Harvey Weinstein scandal (Mod warning in op.)

Outlaw Pete

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

His second account, the ABECFoundation (I think that's the one) has blocked Asia Argento on twitter-that says quite a lot. About him.

Yeah, been watching throughout the evening. Anthony Bourdain‏ getting stuck in too. I can't stand Baldwin personally, libtard extraordinaire as far as I'm concerned, but Asia did say some fcuked up s*** to him earlier. Said he was a moron, that he was mansplaining (good one) and suggested also that he was maybe covering for his pals.

Outlaw Pete

Richard Dreyfuss's son saying Spacey groped him when he was 18 and in front of his old man.


https://twitter.com/THR/status/926939236556771333

HandsomeBob

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Yeah, been watching throughout the evening. Anthony Bourdain‏ getting stuck in too. I can't stand Baldwin personally, libtard extraordinaire as far as I'm concerned, but Asia did say some fcuked up s*** to him earlier. Said he was a moron, that he was mansplaining (good one) and suggested also that he was maybe covering for his pals.

I don't know what Baldwin would have to gain about making that statement publicly so I doubt he's covering for anyone. He's made himself a target needlessly so I can take him at his word.

As for the mansplaining, I don't think he attempted to justify anything.

RabbleRouser2k

strandroad wrote: »

Whedon had multiple female characters in shows when it wasn't a standard, I give him credit here. But their portrayal was often creepy, and looking back we can wonder if he cast so many to build adoring harems and dating pools. He certainly had a type and an age bracket.

Yeah-I often, looking back, saw more 'progressive' writing in shows like The Golden Girls. (Charlie's angel's was a real forerunner too-as was the Wonder woman show. When it was announced Whedon would be adapting the character of Wonder Woman-people thought it was a perfect match. Thankfully it didn't happen-the leaked script had them counting their blessings. David E Kelly, he of Ally McBeal, shot a pilot for the show-it never aired, buy was torrented-absolutely dreadful. Really bad).

The 90s was when there was good women lead shows-Ally McBeal was good for a while, My So Called Life, Dana Scully in X Files. The disappointing thing about them, including Whedon's Buffy, was much of the writing was by dudes-even in Sex and the City-so it was this 'not really'women's/ young women's voices-just male writers imagining what they would say.
And that really shows in Whedon written tv shows-they don't age well.

HandsomeBob wrote: »

I don't know what Baldwin would have to gain about making that statement publicly so I doubt he's covering for anyone. He's made himself a target needlessly so I can take him at his word.

As for the mansplaining, I don't think he attempted to justify anything.

When someone uses the word 'mansplaining' it's literally an attempt to bully someone-it shows they're close minded and not open to debate. It's usage is similar to 'you on your period, love?' Both are ridiculous. Claiming someone is mansplaining is pretty much openly admitting you have no rebuttal.

As you say, he wasn't justifying anything-but I do think he shone a light on how so much of this went unnoticed. Despite 'everyone' having a Harvey story. The hush money, ugly as it is to say, lead to a 'you can do whatever you want, then pay em off after'. And when money is no object...a person can do what they want-in their eyes.

padser

Netflix has now appeared to lay down and ultimatum meaning that that House of Cards season 6 can only proceed of Spaceys character is killed off.

I've been a huge HOC cards fan (albeit seasons 4 and 5 are a massive step down on 1-3) but I wouldn't be watching a season 6 without Frank Underwood - whatever the media spin surrounding the show, it's always been a one star show focused on one character.

The reality for me is, whether or not Spacey was diddling the tea boy while making it, HOC was a great show and there doesn't seem to be any point in continuing it without it's main attraction.

Again, as per my previous quotes, killing off a man's careers based on an unprovable allegation from 30+ years ago, loads of anonymous "tip offs" and a couple of allegations from people who benefit from the limelight of publicity seems wrong and premature. The allegations may be accurate - but we are way short of the standard of proof that should be required to kill someone's career.

Shelga

padser wrote: »

Netflix has now appeared to lay down and ultimatum meaning that that House of Cards season 6 can only proceed of Spaceys character is killed off.

I've been a huge HOC cards fan (albeit seasons 4 and 5 are a massive step down on 1-3) but I wouldn't be watching a season 6 without Frank Underwood - whatever the media spin surrounding the show, it's always been a one star show focused on one character.

The reality for me is, whether or not Spacey was diddling the tea boy while making it, HOC was a great show and there doesn't seem to be any point in continuing it without it's main attraction.

Again, as per my previous quotes, killing off a man's careers based on an unprovable allegation from 30+ years ago, loads of anonymous "tip offs" and a couple of allegations from people who benefit from the limelight of publicity seems wrong and premature. The allegations may be accurate - but we are way short of the standard of proof that should be required to kill someone's career.

Agreed. If they continue the show and have Frank killed off screen, it will be an absolute farce. I love the character of Claire, but come on. I’ll be sad if the series ends abruptly with no continuation after season 5, but it’s better than carrying on with no Frank.

Earthhorse

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

We saw how easily a producer can kill a still young career. Google Clint Eastwood for example, he killed Sondra Locke's career once their relationship ended-no rape involved there, just awfulness.

...

A fantasy, possibly, but then again he did make fun of kids with cancer. Even when the article he was mocking had the 'Paul Ryan meets teen survivors of cancer' title. So it's not beneath him. (That references the fantasy thing-I had to edit that for brevity, and lost the original post. Not referencing Weinstein and co).

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/apr/27/joss-whedon-tweet-demeans-cancer-survivors-hit-rep/

Being honest, I'm not interested in scrutinizing Whedon's every last post, plot line and poster design. I'm sure the guy isn't squeaky clean or perfect but I still think it's very damaging to place him alongside the others being accused of far worse just as it is damaging to place him on some feminist pedestal as he was for so many years.

Earthhorse

padser wrote: »

Again, as per my previous quotes, killing off a man's careers based on an unprovable allegation from 30+ years ago, loads of anonymous "tip offs" and a couple of allegations from people who benefit from the limelight of publicity seems wrong and premature. The allegations may be accurate - but we are way short of the standard of proof that should be required to kill someone's career.

I get what you are saying but, similar to Weinstein, Spacey's behaviour was somewhat of an open secret on any production he worked on. I know because someone in the industry told me last year. His fall from grace had been incredibly swift precisely because there are so many accounts that will corroborate what's been said about him. And it's not a court of law, they don't need to prove things beyond a reasonable doubt or whatever.

GritBiscuit

padser wrote: »

The allegations may be accurate - but we are way short of the standard of proof that should be required to kill someone's career.

What tends to happen in these "trial by media" type situations is a period of time is given for the person accused of whatever misbehaviour to answer the allegations - that can be anything from categorical denial and rebuttal up to taking a civil case and suing for defamation. In this case we had a sheepish apology, no rebuttal.

To carry on your courtroom analogy; while the allegations obviously fall short of the standard of proof expected in a criminal case, the entirety of the defence amounts to a tacit admission - and so what proof is therefor required?

strandroad

padser wrote: »

Again, as per my previous quotes, killing off a man's careers based on an unprovable allegation from 30+ years ago, loads of anonymous "tip offs" and a couple of allegations from people who benefit from the limelight of publicity seems wrong and premature. The allegations may be accurate - but we are way short of the standard of proof that should be required to kill someone's career.

Make no mistake none of this is new to Netflix; they had a list of allegations from their own set of the very same House of Cards. They sat on them then, but decided to act now and I doubt it's because of ethics or even PR - a lot of it is simple bean counting. They have now exposed themselves to a barrage of lawsuits - if they leave Spacey in place and he as much as says boo to someone, they would have knowingly exposed this person to a molester so here comes a workplace lawsuit, possibly a class lawsuit. Similarly their production insurance may have been recalculated and the ends don't meet anymore. It's a numbers game.

Annasopra

eviltwin wrote: »

I think it's very relevant. Spacey didn't go to the room of a child looking for sex, he went into his own room at a party and found a young guy in there and made an assumption. There is no indication he knew the guy was underage. At a party, an adult situation, drunk, it could be a mistake. He tried it on and stopped when asked. I really don't see the issue here, it's not like he was hanging around a school looking for kids to shag.

Oh come on - how could you mistake a 14 year old for an adult!!

4068ac1elhodqr

Noticed in the newspaper that Sloth Weinstein has a CBE, like Jimmy Saville and many others there seems to be a real trend for these types to have fancy letters after their names.

Penn

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-5050493/Uma-Thurman-opens-sexual-assault-Hollywood.html

A very cryptic message from Uma-seems like she may very well have suffered at the hands of Harvey. She's getting support, and called on to speak out.

I almost wonder if part of her anger is at Tarantino given the story that came out about Darryl Hannah during Kill Bill. Certainly be interesting to hear what she has to say when she finally does speak out.

Outlaw Pete

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Oh come on - how could you mistake a 14 year old for an adult!!

You could legally (heterosexually at least) marry a 14-year-old in New York up until recently (with parental approval) so maybe he was under the impression that having sex at that age was okay too? I mean, what else would a couple be expected to be doing on their honeymoon, playing Monopoly? Marriage being legal at that age could certainly be reasonably inferred that sex is legal at that age also.


https://twitter.com/NYGovCuomo/status/877249474149720067

retro:electro

Or maybe it's not that psychologically complex and he's actually sexually attracted to minors and is a creep?

Outlaw Pete

You mean, a creep like Bowie, Don Johnson and Elvis?

I guess it's possible.

retro:electro

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

You mean, a creep like Bowie, Don Johnson and Elvis?

I guess it's possible.

Are you throwing them in as an attempt to try and dilute his creepiness? A twisted defence. He's still a creep, as are they.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

You could legally (heterosexually at least) marry a 14-year-old in New York up until recently (with parental approval) so maybe he was under the impression that having sex at that age was okay too? I mean, what else would a couple be expected to be doing on their honeymoon, playing Monopoly? Marriage being legal at that age could certainly be reasonably inferred that sex is legal at that age also.


https://twitter.com/NYGovCuomo/status/877249474149720067

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

You mean, a creep like Bowie, Don Johnson and Elvis?

I guess it's possible.

I feel like you think there's some kind of salient point here.

Whatever stupid horseshít it is could you just come out and say it rather than throwing out vague posts like this please?

Wibbs

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

You mean, a creep like Bowie, Don Johnson and Elvis?

I guess it's possible.

Id call them creeps myself. Along with Jimmy Page, Marvin Gaye, Chuck Berry, Jerry Lee Lewis and a few others.

silverharp

for any Maureen O'Hara fans out there

HandsomeBob

Baldwin's problem is his temper. Made a very matter of fact and thoughtful statement only to blow it with his tweeting.

McDermotX

Next one up



Julianna Margulies

http://variety.com/2017/biz/news/julianna-margulies-steven-seagal-harvey-weinstein-1202607192/

Julianna Margulies recalled an encounter with Steven Seagal during an interview on Sirius XM’s “Just Jenny” Friday morning, in which Margulies met the actor at a hotel after a female casting director told her he wanted to go over a scene.

“I lived in Brooklyn,” the “Good Wife” actress, who was 23 at the time, remembered. “And I said, ‘Oh, I don’t do that. I don’t travel. I don’t have money for a cab.’ And I didn’t. And she says, ‘Don’t worry, we’ll reimburse you. And I’m here.'”

Margulies said when she arrived at the hotel room, Seagal was armed with a gun.

“I got to the hotel around 10:40, and she wasn’t there. And he was alone and he made sure that I saw his gun, which I had never seen a gun in real life,” she continued. “I got out of there unscathed…I never was raped, and I never was harmed. I don’t know how I got out of that hotel room..........

Biggest lickspittle on boardz

McDermotX wrote: »

Next one up

http://variety.com/2017/biz/news/julianna-margulies-steven-seagal-harvey-weinstein-1202607192/

Steven Seagal is an utter scumbag, according to many in the industry. He has also previously been accused in a civil case of trafficking sex slaves:

Actor Steven Seagal trafficked young women to use as his sex slaves, according to a £650,000 lawsuit filed by a former model.

Kayden Nguyen, 23, claims she was treated as a 'sex toy' and sexually assaulted three times after applying to be his personal assistant.

The Under Siege star, 58, is also said to have kept two Russian 'attendants' who were on call 24 hours a day to satisfy his desires.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1265720/Action-star-Steven-Seagal-denies-allegations-sex-trafficking-sexual-assault.html

Apparently Seagal's party piece is to walk up to someone and kick the hard in the testicles as a sort of rutting chimpanzee territorial display. A lot of actors have talked about their run ins with him.
John Leguizamo hates Seagal with a passion:

brooke 2

padser wrote: »

Netflix has now appeared to lay down and ultimatum meaning that that House of Cards season 6 can only proceed of Spaceys character is killed off.

I've been a huge HOC cards fan (albeit seasons 4 and 5 are a massive step down on 1-3) but I wouldn't be watching a season 6 without Frank Underwood - whatever the media spin surrounding the show, it's always been a one star show focused on one character.

The reality for me is, whether or not Spacey was diddling the tea boy while making it, HOC was a great show and there doesn't seem to be any point in continuing it without it's main attraction.

Again, as per my previous quotes, killing off a man's careers based on an unprovable allegation from 30+ years ago, loads of anonymous "tip offs" and a couple of allegations from people who benefit from the limelight of publicity seems wrong and premature. The allegations may be accurate - but we are way short of the standard of proof that should be required to kill someone's career.

Really? The thought has not occurred to you that they may know a LOT more than you do about Spacey's 'activities' and, as such, may not have any choice
other than to drop him. The mystery is that it has taken so long for them to do so.

RabbleRouser2k

Biggest lickspittle on boardz wrote: »

Apparently Seagal's party piece is to walk up to someone and kick the hard in the testicles as a sort of rutting chimpanzee territorial display. A lot of actors have talked about their run ins with him.
John Leguizamo hates Seagal with a passion:

JAime Pressley and Jenni McCarthy have two similar 'casting couch' stories from him too. They pretty much told him to 'F*** off'. With Pressley, he ended groping her breasts.

There's also stories of how Seagal beat his ex-wife Kelly LeBrock.

Rob Schneider has many a story about him.

And there is the legendary story of Gene Lebell choking Seagal out leading to Seagal pooping his pants.

http://fightstate.com/steven-seagal-choked-out-by-judo-master-****s-his-pants/2/

brooke 2

silverharp wrote: »

for any Maureen O'Hara fans out there

Heard that quoted on Marian Finucane this morning. According to MF, that Maureen O'Hara article dates from 1947! :eek:

Wibbs

brooke 2 wrote: »

Heard that quoted on Marian Finucane this morning. According to MF, that Maureen O'Hara article dates from 1947! :eek:

Maureen was a bloody strong woman who took no sh1t and was not afraid to call a spade a spade and publicly with it. Even back then. John Wayne, her costar in many flics, for all his many faults said that nobody screwed with Maureen and he had huge respect for her, even if they differed wildly in their personal political and social views. I would love to get a time machine and stick Maureen in her prime(hell, in her 80's) in a room with greasy Harvey in his bathrobe in the late 90's. Though a bit one sided a fight. Variety headline the next day "Ms O'Hara sports testicle earrings at premiere"

brooke 2

Wibbs wrote: »

Maureen was a bloody strong woman who took no sh1t and was not afraid to call a spade a spade and publicly with it. Even back then. John Wayne, her costar in many flics, for all his many faults said that nobody screwed with Maureen and he had huge respect for her, even if they differed wildly in their personal political and social views. I would love to get a time machine and stick Maureen in her prime(hell, in her 80's) in a room with greasy Harvey in his bathrobe in the late 90's. Though a bit one sided a fight. Variety headline the next day "Ms O'Hara sports testicle earrings at premiere"

:D

RabbleRouser2k

Wibbs wrote: »

Maureen was a bloody strong woman who took no sh1t and was not afraid to call a spade a spade and publicly with it. Even back then. John Wayne, her costar in many flics, for all his many faults said that nobody screwed with Maureen and he had huge respect for her, even if they differed wildly in their personal political and social views. I would love to get a time machine and stick Maureen in her prime(hell, in her 80's) in a room with greasy Harvey in his bathrobe in the late 90's. Though a bit one sided a fight. Variety headline the next day "Ms O'Hara sports testicle earrings at premiere"

Yeah-and she also kept a secret too. Not molestation/ groping related-that's a crime, not a secret. She had her stuff she kept to herself, maintaining her privacy.
Not like today where it's 'I will now tell you every single detail of my life-just because you didn't ask'.

B.A._Baracus

Hollywood is one weird place.
So let's say you are an actor in Hollywood and you want to get on. You have to face the reality that so many other successful actors got on because they slept with directors, producers and anyone in between. Should you be put in a situation where someone wants to sleep with you your career may get struck-off should you say no depending on how powerful they are. You can have other established and famous actors trying it on with you too.
Given that it's so hard to get on an actor would be susceptible to agree. Let's be honest, some would even do whatever it takes to begin with.

Then you have the other option of joining Scientology to progress your career. Which is mental as we all know.

According to Joe Rogan, the day to day life as a struggling actor is also insane. Dealing with phonies who try to make themselves out as "bigger than what they are", to having to deal with people who have such PC opinions as to not upset anyone (another element of fakeness) to dealing with casting directors who are incapable of treating you with basic human respect.

Emma Thompson says Hollywood has a great way of belittling you and pretty much mind-fu*king you. This is even towards established actors. So god help you if you are unknown.

As an film extra you are pretty much handled like a monkey. You cannot interact with the main cast at anytime on-set. You take your lunch after the cast and crew have had theirs. You get what's left over.

Accordingly, it is akin to swimming with the sharks from the top to the bottom. Shaking hands with scum, peodeos, users and phonies. A town that will chew you up and spit you out.

Hollywood magic, huh?

Outlaw Pete

anna080 wrote: »

Are you throwing them in as an attempt to try and dilute his creepiness? A twisted defence. He's still a creep, as are they.

Nope, just trying to get a sense of where you stand on the issue when the person that has hooked up with the 14-year-old is a little more endeared to the public that someone like Spacey is (who, let's be honest, was already seen as a bit of a creep even before all this). Apparently you view the guys I mentioned in no different a light than you see Spacey and so all's good in the hood. You'd be surprised how many people will just say 'Ah, but...that's a bit different' when the likes of Don Johnson in particular is mentioned. Presumably because him and Miss Griffith went on to have a successful long term relationship which gave us the lovely little Miss 50 shades.

Wibbs wrote: »

Id call them creeps myself. Along with Jimmy Page, Marvin Gaye, Chuck Berry, Jerry Lee Lewis and a few others.

I don't know about that, Wibbs. I mean, some of the antics of those guys were off the charts abusive whereas I don't know that Elvis, Don or Bowie ever were, which was the reason I named those three in particular. Of course the mere fact that someone in their 20's is hooking up with a 14 year old is, in and of itself a form of abuse, which I totally get, but to the degree that those guys were? Not so sure about that. Some of the them were with girls that were much younger than 14 for a start.

I just feel that it's early days to be calling out Spacey as some pedo predator. It's not like he was just jumping on drunk 14-year-olds. I don't think it's an insignificant coincidence that both of the lads who claim he made sexual advances at / had sex with, were both gay. Spacey said to one of them that now that he was 14 it was okay for them to get together (he was 24 I believe) but that it hadn't been when they first met two years prior. That's why I mentioned the Age of Consent to marry being 14 in New York at the time. Gives some context.

Listen, I'm no big fan of the guy, never was, he defo should be ashamed of himself for never coming out over the years, given that not doing so (when pretty everyone knew he was gay) suggests that he feels there is something shameful about being gay.

With regards to this current debacle, I just feel it's all a bit pitch forks at the minute. It was the mid to late 80's, homophobia was sky high with HIV in the media (nicknamed the Gay Plague for a time) no mainstream actor was out, a lot of sexual hook ups were secertive in nature and so when in his mid 20's, drunk at a party, he tried it on with someone a few months off their 15th birthday. Does that really justify the hysteria at the minute? Pulling his image off posters, cancelling TV shows... it all just seems at bit much. As for the other accusations over the years, with adult men, their stories seem a little opportunistic to me. If it turns out that in his 30's and 40's he pursed young boys, then I'll of course review my position, but right not, my view would be the the reaction is a touch disproportionate at the moment.

RabbleRouser2k

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Nope, just trying to get a sense of where you stand on the issue when the person that has hooked up with the 14-year-old is a little more endeared to the public that someone like Spacey is (who, let's be honest, was already seen as a bit of a creep even before all this). Apparently you view the guys I mentioned in no different a light than you see Spacey and so all's good in the hood. You'd be surprised how many people will just say 'Ah, but...that's a bit different' when the likes of Don Johnson in particular is mentioned. Presumably because him and Miss Griffith went on to have a successful long term relationship which gave us the lovely little Miss 50 shades.



I don't know about that, Wibbs. I mean, some of the antics of those guys were off the charts abusive whereas I don't know that Elvis, Don or Bowie ever were, which was the reason I named those three in particular. Of course the mere fact that someone in their 20's is hooking up with a 14 year old is, in and of itself a form of abuse, which I totally get, but to the degree that those guys were? Not so sure about that. Some of the them were with girls that were much younger than 14 for a start.

I just feel that it's early days to be calling out Spacey as some pedo predator. It's not like he was just jumping on drunk 14-year-olds. I don't think it's an insignificant coincidence that both of the lads who claim he made sexual advances at / had sex with, were both gay. Spacey said to one of them that now that he was 14 it was okay for them to get together (he was 24 I believe) but that it hadn't been when they first met two years prior. That's why I mentioned the Age of Consent to marry being 14 in New York at the time. Gives some context.

Listen, I'm no big fan of the guy, never was, he defo should be ashamed of himself for never coming out over the years, given that not doing so (when pretty everyone knew he was gay) suggests that he feels there is something shameful about being gay.

With regards to this current debacle, I just feel it's all a bit pitch forks at the minute. It was the mid to late 80's, homophobia was sky high with HIV in the media (nicknamed the Gay Plague for a time) no mainstream actor was out, a lot of sexual hook ups were secertive in nature and so when in his mid 20's, drunk at a party, he tried it on with someone a few months off their 15th birthday. Does that really justify the hysteria at the minute? Pulling his image off posters, cancelling TV shows... it all just seems at bit much. As for the other accusations over the years, with adult men, their stories seem a little opportunistic to me. If it turns out that in his 30's and 40's he pursed young boys, then I'll of course review my position, but right not, my view would be the the reaction is a touch disproportionate at the moment.

(Just have to ask-what does 'them being gay' mean? Many of the women Harvey raped or groped were straight-they didn't want to be groped or raped. Anthony Rapp is bisexual, if a woman had hit on him-his reaction would have been the same. It's about consent.)

I would have questions to ask all of those people, for sure-especially since Tippi Hedren had to sign any marriage certs to allow Melanie marry Don.
What made people look upon the Spacey things with disgust was how much of it was without consent. The relationship with the 14 year old (who is not Rapp, he's someone else entirely) was consensual-in as consensual a relationship with a minor can be-but it ended when Spacey tried to rape him.
The 'rape' and lack of consent is what I, and others, have the utmost problem with.

Many of those he tried to grope have stated they were straight-there was no consent given, at all. They didn't want anything to do with him.
Do I have a problem with the Bowie and Jagger stuff? Yes. But that is for the Ms Maddox-and she stated she gave consent. No force was used, and if she said no-it was accepted.

You say no to Spacey, he would not accept it-so much so you would not be around him or in a room alone with him based on his actions.
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2017/11/03/kevin-spacey-had-a-sexual-relationship-with-a-14-year-old-and-tried-to-raped-him-alleged-victim-says/

Read this account-does this sound like any consent was given?

Outlaw Pete

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

(Just have to ask-what does 'them being gay' mean? Many of the women Harvey raped or groped were straight-they didn't want to be groped or raped. Anthony Rapp is bisexual, if a woman had hit on him-his reaction would have been the same. It's about consent.)

Well, to me it's indicative of Spacey seeking a consensual homosexual interaction rather than out to assault some young boy given that both young lads were also into guys. Someone that just wants to assault or rape a someone wouldn't care about the sexual preferences of their victims, I wouldn't have thought, as they are just interested in their own sexual gratification.

Read this account-does this sound like any consent was given?

I already read that (on the original publication of it). That's the chap I was referring to when I said that Spacey had met him two years prior to anything sexual happening and had told him that he hadn't made a move because of his age. Here's the direct quote:

He said, “I want to see you, and I want you to come to my apartment.” He said he’d always been really drawn to me at the acting classes, but had stayed away because I was 12. So I’m like [laughs] … now that I was 14.

As for the alleged attempted rape, they were already having sex with each other at that stage and it sounds more like Spacey invited him over for more sex but the young lad felt it was to kiss and cuddle. May sound blunt but I'm sure if Spacey wanted to rape him, he easily could have. The young lad had already been having sex with another older guy in his 20's for a year by that stage too (his cousin).

Annasopra

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Well, to me it's indicative of Spacey seeking a consensual homosexual interaction rather than out to assault some young boy given that both young lads were also into guys. Someone that just wants to assault or rape a someone wouldn't care about the sexual preferences of their victims, I wouldn't have thought, as they are just interested in their own sexual gratification.

This is ridiculous and actually one of the most sickening posts I have ever read on this site. Rapp was 14. It really is off the wall bizarre you are trying to excuse abuse because he is now openly out as bisexual. What has his sexual orientation now got to do with anything?
Abuse is abuse.

marklazarcovic

we always hear these stories decades later, when the guys have had their wicked ways for a long long time unchecked, surely there are people doing it right now who are known,and we will hear about in 20 years,hollowwood should clean its decks because now is the time .


also i dont believe spacey is homosexual/gay at all, he is a predator with a preference for young men,by all accounts,young men who dont want his advances. he's using gay as a cover.

Bambi985

Biggest lickspittle on boardz wrote: »

Apparently Seagal's party piece is to walk up to someone and kick the hard in the testicles as a sort of rutting chimpanzee territorial display. A lot of actors have talked about their run ins with him.
John Leguizamo hates Seagal with a passion:

That's an interesting link that you should post here for the thread that's in it.

That's Jian Ghomeshi interviewing Leguizamo there, former CBC radio star who was the subject of one of the most high profile sexual assault trials in Canadian history a few years back. He was acquitted in the end which was a major shock to the entire country given the amount of women that had described his abusive and sexually violent behaviour against them and the former staffers of his radio show "Q" who described the horrifying culture that existed within the team that was left unchecked because Jian was the "talent" and the face of the CBC.

More than 20 women came forward with allegations of being slapped, punched, bitten, choked, or smothered by him. Sexual assault aside, Ghomeshi was an out-and-out bully by all accounts, one staffer said anyone who disagreed with him would be cut out and anyone that confronted his behaviour would be targeted. But he was the CBC's cash cow and his dulcet tones and socially progressive and "thoughtful" interviews meant he was never pulled up for smacking the arses of his colleagues or telling his producers he wanted to "hate fcuk' them.

I knew some people who worked in the CBC before his fall from grace and the consensus was that everyone knew he was "a creepy dude" but the CBC decided to roll their eyes and look the other way because hey, he knew how to sell a crowd.

retro:electro

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Well, to me it's indicative of Spacey seeking a consensual homosexual interaction rather than out to assault some young boy given that both young lads were also into guys. Someone that just wants to assault or rape a someone wouldn't care about the sexual preferences of their victims, I wouldn't have thought, as they are just interested in their own sexual gratification.



I already read that (on the original publication of it). That's the chap I was referring to when I said that Spacey had met him two years prior to anything sexual happening and had told him that he hadn't made a move because of his age. Here's the direct quote:



As for the alleged attempted rape, they were already having sex with each other at that stage and it sounds more like Spacey invited him over for more sex but the young lad felt it was to kiss and cuddle. May sound blunt but I'm sure if Spacey wanted to rape him, he easily could have. The young lad had already been having sex with another older guy in his 20's for a year by that stage too (his cousin).

Pete, ffs. Come on.

Are grown men who abuse young girls "seeking someone of their orientation" or are they just disgusting pieces of sh!t exploiting a minor?
So should we spare a thought for how Spacey was so considerate as to seek out someone who was also gay?
I actually can't go any further.

valoren

We are entitled to our privacy, whether famous or not, and Spacey exploited that to harass.
Privately he is a gay man with a predilection for young men and boys. When you're 14 years old, you are a boy, simple as that.

He knew he could hide behind the public front of him being protective of his private life, that it wasn't anyone's business.
It was known that he was gay behind the scenes. It was an open secret. Any male actor or anyone in the media who has been harassed by Spacey and who wanted to report this private behavior would invariably 'out' him as gay.

You're hands would be tied as you would be setting yourself up to be attacked as someone harassing a very private man who was at pains to not dignify rumors about his sexuality and was wishing to mind his own business. Spacey knew that outing someone was somewhat verboten to that end. There could also potentially be slander charges, invasion of privacy suits for that person. There would be potential damage to their reputation's as them being deemed trouble makers.

So long as he stayed in the closet he was free to covertly harass men sexually. The idea that he was closeted enabled him to use claims of privacy as a shield, a deterrent for people looking closely at his private life.

In any case where someone outed him, exposing his harassment, he could play the victim. And as a double Oscar winner, the man could play.
His statement on the Rapp charges seemingly vindicate that for me. Oh-I don't recall- err Sorry - oh and by the way, yes I am a Gay man. It was cynical, belittling of Rapp and a performance.

It is with good reason we are discussing Spacey on the Weinstein thread. His exposure has opened the floodgates where Spacey and his predilection's can be confronted.

Who isn't a scumbag? Or a creep?

I know David Schwimmer got praise for asking whether an interviewer would like a chaperone to do an interview in his bedroom, after the place they were in was too noisy

Keanu Reeves seems like an utterly lovely gentleman. If allegations come out against him, I'll just give up.

silverharp

Bambi985 wrote: »

That's Jian Ghomeshi interviewing Leguizamo there, former CBC radio star who was the subject of one of the most high profile sexual assault trials in Canadian history a few years back. He was acquitted in the end which was a major shock to the entire country given the amount of women that had described his abusive and sexually violent behaviour against them and the former staffers of his radio show "Q" who described the horrifying culture that existed within the team that was left unchecked because Jian was the "talent" and the face of the CBC.

More than 20 women came forward with allegations of being slapped, punched, bitten, choked, or smothered by him. Sexual assault aside, Ghomeshi was an out-and-out bully by all accounts, one staffer said anyone who disagreed with him would be cut out and anyone that confronted his behaviour would be targeted. But he was the CBC's cash cow and his dulcet tones and socially progressive and "thoughtful" interviews meant he was never pulled up for smacking the arses of his colleagues or telling his producers he wanted to "hate fcuk' them.

I knew some people who worked in the CBC before his fall from grace and the consensus was that everyone knew he was "a creepy dude" but the CBC decided to roll their eyes and look the other way because hey, he knew how to sell a crowd.

Ive limited knowledge of this one cos I never heard of the guy but want there issues with the alleged victims, collusion and changing stories?

Outlaw Pete

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

This is ridiculous and actually one of the most sickening posts I have ever read on this site.

Any chance you could quit being so dramatic maybe.

Rapp was 14. It really is off the wall bizarre you are trying to excuse abuse because he is now openly out as bisexual. What has his sexual orientation now got to do with anything?
Abuse is abuse.

First of all, I am not trying to "excuse" anything. If he is found to have done anything illegal, then he should be brought to bear for it. You ask me what relevance Rapp's sexual orientation has but I have already explained what I feel it is indicative of. You want me to repeat myself? Fine: To me it shows that Spacey was not a mere predator preying on any young boy that happened across his path, but more a young guy in his 20's interested only in consensual sex at a time when it was not unusual for people in their 20's to publicly date (and legally marry) someone who was 14. Like I said, if it turns out that in his later years he was with other 14 year olds, I shall review my position.

anna080 wrote: »

Pete, ffs. Come on.

Are grown men who abuse young girls "seeking someone of their orientation" or are they just disgusting pieces of sh!t exploiting a minor?

Telling that you only mention grown men when talking about "pieces of sh!t exploiting a minor", especially given how common it is these days to hear about older women having sex with their 14-year-old students...... but to address your 'point': given that heterosexuals are not a minority, it would hardly be a task and so I don't think the sexuality of any such girl would say anything at all. It's the fact that homosexuals were a small sub section of society at the time which makes it factor worth considering.

As to whether such men (/women) should be considered to automatically be "pieces of ****"? Well imv, some should, some shouldn't. I mean, I believe in close-in-age exemptions with regards to the age of consent to the degree that it would mean Don Johnson did nothing wrong but Spacey would have broken the law.

So should we spare a thought for how Spacey was so considerate as to seek out someone who was also gay?

No, we should just consider it before labeling him a predatory pedophile maybe is my point.

retro:electro

Ffs Pete. For the most part I actually like your posts, some are really insightful and you seem like a nice dude. But what the fcuk does an abuser actually have to do to be condemned by you? I'm sorry if that comment seems unfair but there is only so far I'm willing to bend in order to understand your perspective. There is no such fcuking thing as an adult having a "consentual relationship" with a 14 year old. This kind of thing should not be tolerated by anyone on any level of any society ever- no matter what orientation, colour, gender- ANYTHING.
If this is going to be a continual theme here with you defending this kind of sh!t then I've no interest in taking this conversation any further.

Annasopra

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Any chance you could quit being so dramatic maybe.


First of all, I am not trying to "excuse" anything.

No. I am being dramatic because your posts are frankly shocking and sickening and disturbing. You are going out of your way to find numerous excuses for Spacey.

Odhinn

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

I just feel that it's early days to be calling out Spacey as some pedo predator. It's not like he was just jumping on drunk 14-year-olds.

Looks very like it.

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

I don't think it's an insignificant coincidence that both of the lads who claim he made sexual advances at / had sex with, were both gay. Spacey said to one of them that now that he was 14 it was okay for them to get together (he was 24 I believe) but that it hadn't been when they first met two years prior. That's why I mentioned the Age of Consent to marry being 14 in New York at the time. Gives some context.

...consent to marry requiring parental permission and written consent by a Judge. Totally different from the law on sexual consent, which spacey was well in breach of.

Biggest lickspittle on boardz

Deleted User wrote: »

Who isn't a scumbag? Or a creep?

I know David Schwimmer got praise for asking whether an interviewer would like a chaperone to do an interview in his bedroom, after the place they were in was too noisy

Keanu Reeves seems like an utterly lovely gentleman. If allegations come out against him, I'll just give up.

The reports on Keanu Reeves can be summarised as such: he is quite possibly the single greatest dude Hollywood has even produced. He's a living saint, or as close as you're gonna get. And for anyone who has read up on his tragic family life, it would have been very easy for him to throw in the towel and go over to the dark side.
I'd take a bullet for the guy.

So you can sleep soundly now

Outlaw Pete

Odhinn wrote: »

...consent to marry requiring parental permission and written consent by a Judge. Totally different from the law on sexual consent, which spacey was well in breach of.

I never said it was sexual consent. What are you on about? Even the quote you used said "age of consent to marry".

Maybe read a little of the thread before posting in it:

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

You could legally (heterosexually at least) marry a 14-year-old in New York up until recently (with parental approval) so maybe he was under the impression that having sex at that age was okay too? I mean, what else would a couple be expected to be doing on their honeymoon, playing Monopoly? Marriage being legal at that age could certainly be reasonably inferred that sex is legal at that age also.

Odhinn

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

I never said it was sexual consent. What are you on about?

Maybe read a little of the thread before posting in it:

He confused a law saying it was ok to marry with parental consent and signed consent from a judge - highly unlikely.

so maybe he was under the impression that having sex at that age was okay too?

....so the lad turned up with a form signed by his parents and a judge and he thought "Grand then so"..?

Biggest lickspittle on boardz

Biggest lickspittle on boardz wrote: »

The reports on Keanu Reeves can be summarised as such: he is quite possibly the single greatest dude Hollywood has even produced. He's a living saint, or as close as you're gonna get. And for anyone who has read up on his tragic family life, it would have been very easy for him to throw in the towel and go over to the dark side.
I'd take a bullet for the guy.

So you can sleep soundly now

He is a beautiful time traveller He really seems like a good man.

Mr.Wemmick

Biggest lickspittle on boardz wrote: »

The reports on Keanu Reeves can be summarised as such: he is quite possibly the single greatest dude Hollywood has even produced. He's a living saint, or as close as you're gonna get. And for anyone who has read up on his tragic family life, it would have been very easy for him to throw in the towel and go over to the dark side.
I'd take a bullet for the guy.

So you can sleep soundly now

Totally in awe of Reeves. In the brilliant J. Wick 2 it was pure joy to see him and Fishburne together again. Matrix movies, John Constantine, could watch over and over.

He really is his own man. No one can touch him.

strandroad

I agree, anyone but him. Take Tom Hanks even but leave us Keanu...