Harvey Weinstein scandal (Mod warning in op.)

Outlaw Pete

_Dara_ wrote: »

It's a weird one. I tend to believe what he says though for the reason that the police only cautioned him which tells me that he didn't do much. If he had in any way looked at child porn, he would have been charged, famous or not.

It wasn't just a simple caution though, he was placed on the sex offenders register for five years. The police were also fully ready to prosecute had he not accepted the terms they offered him. He has since claimed that he chose not to go to court as he felt some 12-year-old could perhaps have given evidence and said that she had sex with him and how could he prove her wrong.

Personally, I think he is full of shit. He would have us believe that he clicked on a 'Click Here For Child Porn' banner to prove that British banks were profiting from Child Porn (and then forwarding the money on to the owners of these sites) but that's an absurd thing to expect people to swallow and I'm not sure why they have, as it was well known throughout the 90's that many people in the UK had accessed CP sites and paid with their credit cards. Indeed, that is how Interpol tracked them down, so why, pray tell, would we need Pete Townshend to make that apparent?

It's farcical, as had he phoned whichever section of Scotland Yard that deals with this stuff, and told them his plan, they would have laughed at him and said don't bother, we already know, have you not been reading the papers of the last decade.

Outlaw Pete

Crickey, if ever there was an odd couple:


https://twitter.com/BetteMidler/status/936296701962305537

https://twitter.com/GeraldoRivera/status/936602590619623424

Outlaw Pete

eviltimeban wrote: »

The Gilbert / Stone thing seems a bit suspicious, in terms of Stone explaining the situation. It doesn't look like an exploitative situation.

Aye and more bizarre when you consider what she's will to overlook with regards to Polanski.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHQDfW8H7Ao

I wish she'd tripped running down that hill now.

RabbleRouser2k

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Crickey, if ever there was an odd couple:

The way Babs tries to talk over that conversation is creepy...especially the way she did the same with Corey Feldman. And ppl wonder why she's not liked.

kunst nugget wrote: »

That's not strictly true. But his motives do seem to have been about trying to help. It was an extraordinarily stupid move on his part though.

Barry Crimmins, a US comedian, did something similar in the states and did a massive amount to highlight the issue in the states. His story is told in the fascinating 'Call Me Lucky' documentary that I think is still on Netflix. It's a must watch for everyone.

Yeah, what Crimmins (a survivor of child rape and molestation himself) did was seriously beyond brave. AOL had a serious issue with chatrooms, where people were exchanging child porn images. The names of these places were often under titles like '6 year old girl being raped'-as in the people in the rooms were doing the abusing, and posting images. AOL weren't policing these rooms, despite easily having access to the information of the owners of these accounts. Crimmins went all the way to the government, who were seriously unprepared to investigate or police these sites. Child porn sites were one thing, but chatrooms were like file sharing sites-they had no idea what was going on there.

ButtersSuki

marklazarcovic wrote: »

Gabriel Byrne speaks out about spacey on usual suspects filiming.


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/1ebc779e-d7ad-11e7-945f-b625fa742a9e

Is there any way to view this without an Irish Times subscription?

RabbleRouser2k

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Is there any way to view this without an Irish Times subscription?

The Daily Mail has it. Essentially shooting was shut down for 2 days on The Usual Suspects, because Spacey was being a Piece of crap. He didn't know how bad, just that he'd made advances on a young actor. Singer being the director probably helped brush over it.
Spacey's behaviour continued on quite a number of projects besides TUS.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5145317/The-Usual-Suspects-shut-Kevin-Spacey-sex-behavior.html

Looks like Bryan Singer's imploding-about gawddamn time.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5145403/Bryan-Singer-FIRED-Freddie-Mercury-biopic.htmlhttp://

The stars of the Queen movie have gotten him fired due to his terrible behaviour on set-not turning up, arguments where he threw objects at Rami Malek (he's playing Freddy) and one actor walking off of the set but later convinced to return.

More allegations against Singer are listed in that article, similar stuff to Spacey.

Fox Studios have closed his office on the Fox studios lot...man this is massive.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/bryan-singers-fox-offices-shutting-down-1064305

JP Liz V1

marklazarcovic wrote: »

Gabriel Byrne speaks out about spacey on usual suspects filiming.


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/1ebc779e-d7ad-11e7-945f-b625fa742a9e

How did Spacey get away so long not named and shamed ;:rolleyes:

Danny Masterson has been fired from Netflix sitcom The Ranch

http://www.digitalspy.com/tv/ustv/news/a844666/danny-masterson-fired-netflix-the-ranch-rape-allegations/

RabbleRouser2k

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

How did Spacey get away so long not named and shamed ;:rolleyes:

Danny Masterson has been fired from Netflix sitcom The Ranch

http://www.digitalspy.com/tv/ustv/news/a844666/danny-masterson-fired-netflix-the-ranch-rape-allegations/

He gave consistent, decent performances-despite always giving off a creepy vibe. (My friend and me could never stand the guy, yet two other friends bought all his movies, including the Life of David Gale, which is just awful-Spacey at his smuggest). I think a lot of the time he got away with it because people didn't come forward-and his behaviour probably escalated when 'they just let him do it' (never mind they were ashamed).

Also, the evolution of the information age, and how these 'rumours' made it into the public forum of the internet meant it was harder to 'hush, hush' things. Weinstein was almost found out in 2005, but for the story being buried. But that was only plastering over a gap in a dam-eventually it cracked and the dam burst.

RabbleRouser2k

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/danny-masterson-netflix-executive-rape-allegations_us_5a24b480e4b03c44072e6b97?ncid=engmodushpmg00000004

Rather disturbing how netflix brushed off the Masterson allegations-simply because they didn't 'believe them'-until one victim confronted a Netflix producer.

Venom

Melanie Martinez gets added to the ongoing list, with accusations of rape by former friend Timothy Heller.

https://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/pop/8061580/the-voice-melanie-martinez-denies-rape-allegations-timothy-heller

RabbleRouser2k

Venom wrote: »

Melanie Martinez gets added to the ongoing list, with accusations of rape by former friend Timothy Heller.

https://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/pop/8061580/the-voice-melanie-martinez-denies-rape-allegations-timothy-heller

Her response there is seriously creepy-'she never said no...'

Well, maybe she didn't, but did she say yes?

Outlaw Pete

John Oliver confronted Hoffman at a Q&A.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHHKTcWnnqo

Outlaw Pete

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

Her response there is seriously creepy-'she never said no...'

Well, maybe she didn't, but did she say yes?

Completely disagree.

Lots of people have consensual sex where consent is not verbally given. If this Timothy chick wasn't happy with what Melanie was doing.... then she should've got out of the bed. At the end of the day she let her do what she did and letting someone do something is consenting, even when persuasion is involved.

Only exceptions would be where someone is not in a fit state to consent (either due to intoxication or other impairment such as a mental or physical disability) or where they felt there would be violent consequences to not complying.

For me this is another case where this girl should have gone to the Police when it happened.

Also, given this happened recently enough, there was and is nothing stopping her doing so now.

allym

She had told her repeatedly in the days preceding the event that she did not want to have sex with her. She had been very clear that she was not interested yet this girl went ahead and did it anyway. That’s not consent. An absence of no does not mean yes. And plenty of people feel confused/shocked/frozen when these things happen so not moving away does not mean consent either.

I know people say this a lot and it’s true that not all consent is verbal. But it’s pretty obvious when you’re with someone if they’re consenting to it. This girl apparently lying still and not responding while this other girl had sex with her is not consenting and I think that should be pretty clear.

Outlaw Pete

allym wrote: »

She had told her repeatedly in the days preceding the event that she did not want to have sex with her. She had been very clear that she was not interested yet this girl went ahead and did it anyway. That’s not consent.

Saying you don't want sex at a later point in time, does not mean that should sex occur at a later point in time, then it's rape. Consent happens in the moment.

An absence of no does not mean yes.

In and of it self, no..... but if there are other mitigating factors, then it's relevant.

And plenty of people feel confused/shocked/frozen when these things happen so not moving away does not mean consent either.

So what? You can't cite that as evidence of a rape having taken place. Plenty of people go quiet when consenting also. That's the nature of sex, we all respond differently.

I know people say this a lot and it’s true that not all consent is verbal. But it’s pretty obvious when you’re with someone if they’re consenting to it.

Evidently, it's not always clear, as the recent Rosemary McCabe blogged account of her suggesting she had been raped way back when was a testament to. She even said it herself that she felt the guy thought she had consented.

This girl apparently lying still and not responding while this other girl had sex with her is not consenting and I think that should be pretty clear.

She is conveying consent by not getting the fcuk out of that bed, that's the point. Lying still is not refusing consent (unless she's asleep, or drugged). If I am in a bed with a mate and he starts sucking me off, then I am absolutely conveying consent by remaining in that bed, even if I am saying 'No, don't stop'. I am not a paraplegic and neither is this girl.

allym

Fair enough that’s your opinion but I disagree.

None of us were there and can say one way or another what happened in this situation. But in general, someone not fighting someone off doesn’t mean they’re consenting. When something like this happens your body goes into the “fight/freeze/flee” response and often people have no control over the way their body reacts.

I just think that you can’t discount someone’s account of being raped because they didn’t move away or fight the person off when it’s very clearly documented that plenty of rape victims “freeze” and are completely unable to do so.

Christy42

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Saying you don't want sex at a later point in time, does not mean that should sex occur at a later point in time, then it's rape. Consent happens in the moment.



In and of it self, no..... but if there are other mitigating factors, then it's relevant.



So what? You can't cite that as evidence of a rape having taken place. Plenty of people go quiet when consenting also. That's the nature of sex, we all respond differently.



Evidently, it's not always clear, as the recent Rosemary McCabe blogged account of her suggesting she had been raped way back when was a testament to. She even said it herself that she felt the guy thought she had consented.



She is conveying consent by not getting the fcuk out of that bed, that's the point. Lying still is not refusing consent (unless she's asleep, or drugged). If I am in a bed with a mate and he starts sucking me off, then I am absolutely conveying consent by remaining in that bed, even if I am saying 'No, don't stop'. I am not a paraplegic and neither is this girl.

And if you are terrified? You give consent. It is opt in. Not an opt out. Sure it isn't always verbal but there should be indication.

JP Liz V1

The silence breakers make cover of Time as person(s) of the year

TBH I would've loved to have seen Terry Crews included there.

allym

[Deleted User] wrote: »

TBH I would've loved to have seen Terry Crews included there.

He is. There’s way more people included in the piece than they put on the cover

Edit: full piece is here http://time.com/time-person-of-the-year-2017-silence-breakers/?xid=homepage

PeterParker957

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

The silence breakers make cover of Time as person(s) of the year

I'm assuming "due process" and "evidence" came fourth and fifth ????

Christy42

PeterParker957 wrote: »

I'm assuming "due process" and "evidence" came fourth and fifth ????

Taylor had her case in a court of law.

Most of the accusations had the perps confessing. Are confessions not enough these days? Please what is the standard of proof where you would have us go through a trail after the accused has plead guilty (under no duress it must be said)?

PeterParker957

Christy42 wrote: »

PeterParker957 wrote: »

I'm assuming "due process" and "evidence" came fourth and fifth ????

Taylor had her case in a court of law.

Most of the accusations had the perps confessing. Are confessions not enough these days? Please what is the standard of proof where you would have us go through a trail after the accused has plead guilty (under no duress it must be said)?

smfh

Christy42

PeterParker957 wrote: »

smfh

Incredible argument right there. You want to ignore what went on then feel free.

Don't expect the world to follow you though.

HandsomeBob

Was perplexed at Swift being on the cover but then I remembered her case involving the $1 Dollar. I do recall smiling and saying to myself fair play to her.

Outlaw Pete

allym wrote: »

Fair enough that’s your opinion but I disagree.

None of us were there and can say one way or another what happened in this situation. But in general, someone not fighting someone off doesn’t mean they’re consenting. When something like this happens your body goes into the “fight/freeze/flee” response and often people have no control over the way their body reacts.

I just think that you can’t discount someone’s account of being raped because they didn’t move away or fight the person off when it’s very clearly documented that plenty of rape victims “freeze” and are completely unable to do so.

Yes, for a brief time and generally in very serious sexual assaults where there is an element of fear for one's safety.

Christy42 wrote: »

And if you are terrified?

I already cited that as an exception:

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Only exceptions would be where someone is not in a fit state to consent (either due to intoxication or other impairment such as a mental or physical disability) or where they felt there would be violent consequences to not complying.

.....but it doesn't apply here as there is no reason for her to have been terrified, she was someone she knew and who is physically smaller than her also.

This girl used a dildo on Melanie for quite a long period of time and despite this she at no stage attempted to push her off or leave the bed let alone the room. Quite frankly, it's an insult to genuine victims of sexual assaults to categorize this as one.

Christy42

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Yes, for a brief time and generally in very serious sexual assaults where there is an element of fear for one's safety.



I already cited that as an exception:



.....but it doesn't apply here

Prove it. No knowing someone does not always make it not scary. Nor does being bigger.

Quite frankly the reason for it is irrelevant. I repeat consent is required. Not the lack of a fight or argument. That is how it works. Does not always have to be verbal but it needs to be there.

allym

Having someone violate your body is terrifying and would make someone fearful of their safety regardless of whether there was an actual threat of violence or not. Sexual assault is not being dragged down an alley at knife point.

You cannot say how someone reacts dictates whether it was a sexual assault or not. You’ve no idea how you, or anyone else, would react in that situation.

If you don’t believe her account then fair enough, that’s your opinion. But to base it solely on the fact that she didn’t react as you would expect someone to is unfair. Again, none of us know how we would react and it’s foolish to think otherwise.

Edit: actually the victim knowing the perpetrator often makes it worse in terms of processing what’s happening. There’s an element of the brain going “but this is my friend/boyfriend/husband/girlfriend/wife/whoever... they can’t be doing this”. Which makes it harder for people to respond at all

Wibbs

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

John Oliver confronted Hoffman at a Q&A.

John Oliver is a narcissistic self serving prick going with whatever flow suits. Oft funny and occasionally relevant, yes, but a narcissistic self serving prick going with whatever flow suits throughout.

retro:electro

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

The silence breakers make cover of Time as person(s) of the year

Ronan Farrow should be on there too, imo.

RabbleRouser2k

The photoshop on that cover...jeebus. They've moved the eyes of the women so badly, they've all been Sloth'd. (Wonky eye'd).

Also, look how tall Ashley Judd has been made on that cover-she's shorter than Taylor Swift, but Swift looks tiny. Wth? And why isn't Rose McGowan on the cover, is it cos of the drugs charge? Then where's Annabella Sciorra, or Asia Argento? This is a flawed cover.

John Travolta's movie has been sold by the studio-allegedly based on Travolta's 'indiscretions'-so seems Lionsgate is prepping themselves.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5152637/Travolta-blasts-sexual-assault-rumors-Gotti-release.html

Kingp35

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

The photoshop on that cover...jeebus. They've moved the eyes of the women so badly, they've all been Sloth'd. (Wonky eye'd).

Also, look how tall Ashley Judd has been made on that cover-she's shorter than Taylor Swift, but Swift looks tiny. Wth? And why isn't Rose McGowan on the cover, is it cos of the drugs charge? Then where's Annabella Sciorra, or Asia Argento? This is a flawed cover.
[/URL]

Unfortunately despite the seriousness of the topic, the incredibly bad photoshop was the first thing I noticed. It's awful.

RabbleRouser2k

Kingp35 wrote: »

Unfortunately despite the seriousness of the topic, the incredibly bad photoshop was the first thing I noticed. It's awful.

There's already controversy about including Swift-based on really, really lack lustre claims she's a neo-nazi.

Cos her legal team tried to block some negative article written about her (the ties are there because she won't come out and denounce Neo Naziism...as if she has to-that's like saying 'Murder is bad, m'kay?').

The photoshop-is it me, or is the use of it getting even more unprofessional? It's comical now.

Biggest lickspittle on boardz

Wibbs wrote: »

John Oliver is a narcissistic self serving prick going with whatever flow suits. Oft funny and occasionally relevant, yes, but a narcissistic self serving prick going with whatever flow suits throughout.

It troubles me that Oliver has already decided that Dustin Hoffman is guilty, and isn't allowing for the possibility that some, some accusers have been known to tell fibs every now and then.
Each case should be dealt with strictly going by facts; not feelings, rumours, or gut instincts.

anna080 wrote: »

Ronan Farrow should be on there too, imo.

Above all else, it should have had Corey Haim and Corey Feldman.
They were telling us for years and nobody wanted to know.

HandsomeBob

Biggest lickspittle on boardz wrote: »

Above all else, it should have had Corey Haim and Corey Feldman.
They were telling us for years and nobody wanted to know.

Think we're all guilty on that one. The media presented the two Coreys as two washed up druggies holding onto fame desperately by making such claims, and the public accepted that depiction without question.

It disturbs me that the same people that would have buried such stories are the same ones lapping it up to sell their wares now. That is why we as a society have a duty to always question the media, regardless of how altruistic they may come across as.

Crea

JK Rowling tweeting that she is considering stopping Johnny Depp from playing Grindlewald in the next movie due to the domestic assault allegations.

Crea

JK Rowling tweeting that she is considering stopping Johnny Depp from playing Grindlewald in the next movie due to the domestic assault allegations.

A_Sober_Paddy

Crea wrote: »

JK Rowling tweeting that she is considering stopping Johnny Depp from playing Grindlewald in the next movie due to the domestic assault allegations.

It's an allegation, and he could be losing a gig.

If sex's were reversed we'd be hearing that's it's sexist this sexist that, they are only allegations/ rumours with no foundation.

What happened to innocent until proven guilty

RabbleRouser2k

A_Sober_Paddy wrote: »

It's an allegation, and he could be losing a gig.

If sex's were reversed we'd be hearing that's it's sexist this sexist that, they are only allegations/ rumours with no foundation.

What happened to innocent until proven guilty

She's said the opposite-that she understands if fans boycott cos of Depp. The twitterati are going mental. But Rowling is a survivor of domestic abuse, the way they are responding to this is juvenile.

Venom

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

She's said the opposite-that she understands if fans boycott cos of Depp. The twitterati are going mental. But Rowling is a survivor of domestic abuse, the way they are responding to this is juvenile.

Rowling has a history of jumping the gun and tweeting false information without bothering to check if her facts are correct.

Outlaw Pete

Christy42 wrote: »

Does not always have to be verbal but it needs to be there.

It was there....... remaining in that bed after Melaine began to have oral sex with her was conveying consent.

allym wrote: »

Sexual assault is not being dragged down an alley at knife point.

Yeah, I'm aware of that.

If you don’t believe her account then fair enough, that’s your opinion. But to base it solely on the fact that she didn’t react as you would expect someone to is unfair. Again, none of us know how we would react and it’s foolish to think otherwise.

The only one being foolish here is you. This whole nonsense about believing victims just because they say they were a victim is ridiculous, not to mention dangerous. How about we take each accusation on it's own merits before giving our opinions (not that we should be doing so without a trial having first taken place, mind... but here we unfortunately find ourselves).

Edit: actually the victim knowing the perpetrator often makes it worse in terms of processing what’s happening. There’s an element of the brain going “but this is my friend/boyfriend/husband/girlfriend/wife/whoever... they can’t be doing this”. Which makes it harder for people to respond at all

I'm sure it is hard to tell a friend to stop but awkward sex =/= rape.

Timothy (by her own admission) was harassed for hours by Melanie the night before for sex. She said she was trying to sleep and Melanie wouldn't leave her alone. The next night, despite that, she began playing sex games with her and got back into her bed. She allowed Melanie to touch her knowing that she was sexually attracted to her and even let her touch her breasts. Melanie then went down on her and later used a sex toy on her. Again, Timothy is not a paraplegic and so there is no reason why she could not have just pushed her off her and left the room, let alone why she would freeze in that moment and to remain so for an hour or more.

To cut your inevitable strawman argument(s) off at the pass: No I do not think that just because you get in someone's bed that they then have a right to rape you and I absolutely see how someone could genuinely freeze when the person they are in bed with begins sexually assaulting them......... BUT there would need to be a whole different set of circumstances in place for me (or anyone with so much as an ounce of common sense) to accept that could have been what occurred here.

Someone simply does not freeze when someone touches them that moments before they were happy enough to play sex games with and allow them to fondle their boobs. There was no element of shock here. She knew Melanie was into her and wanted to have sex with her and so if you want to put that down to just being my opinion, knock yourself out, but as far as I am concerned my opinion is based on logical reasoning and yours the latest right-on nonsense about how we should believe all accusations because.................................. well, I'm still waiting for a good reason for why we should be doing that.

Outlaw Pete

Crea wrote: »

JK Rowling tweeting that she is considering stopping Johnny Depp from playing Grindlewald in the next movie due to the domestic assault allegations.

Where did you see that?

As I read what she said earlier and it was pretty much that as long as Johnny and Amber had moved on, that's what she feels people should be doing:

However, the agreements that have been put in place to protect the privacy of two people, both of whom have expressed a desire to get on with their lives, must be respected. Based on our understanding of the circumstances, the filmmakers and I are not only comfortable sticking with our original casting, but genuinely happy to have Johnny playing a major character in the movies.

Rubberchikken

In that situation who lies there and doesn't say stop?
Who cant say no, dont do that?
She could have got up and left. The excuse of wanting to go to sleep, that her friend had worn her down is, imo, nonsense.

Never heard of either of these two before. Is there a sense of jumping on the bandwagon with some of them?

RabbleRouser2k

Well, another accusation thrown at Bryan Singer-he's accused of rape and forcing oral sex on a minor.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5158061/Bryan-Singer-sued-raping-17-year-old-boy.html

Christy42

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

It was there....... remaining in that bed after Melaine began to have oral sex with her was conveying consent.



Yeah, I'm aware of that.



The only one being foolish here is you. This whole nonsense about believing victims just because they say they were a victim is ridiculous, not to mention dangerous. How about we take each accusation on it's own merits before giving our opinions (not that we should be doing so without a trial having first taken place, mind... but here we unfortunately find ourselves).



I'm sure it is hard to tell a friend to stop but awkward sex =/= rape.

Timothy (by her own admission) was harassed for hours by Melanie the night before for sex. She said she was trying to sleep and Melanie wouldn't leave her alone. The next night, despite that, she began playing sex games with her and got back into her bed. She allowed Melanie to touch her knowing that she was sexually attracted to her and even let her touch her breasts. Melanie then went down on her and later used a sex toy on her. Again, Timothy is not a paraplegic and so there is no reason why she could not have just pushed her off her and left the room, let alone why she would freeze in that moment and to remain so for an hour or more.

To cut your inevitable strawman argument(s) off at the pass: No I do not think that just because you get in someone's bed that they then have a right to rape you and I absolutely see how someone could genuinely freeze when the person they are in bed with begins sexually assaulting them......... BUT there would need to be a whole different set of circumstances in place for me (or anyone with so much as an ounce of common sense) to accept that could have been what occurred here.

Someone simply does not freeze when someone touches them that moments before they were happy enough to play sex games with and allow them to fondle their boobs. There was no element of shock here. She knew Melanie was into her and wanted to have sex with her and so if you want to put that down to just being my opinion, knock yourself out, but as far as I am concerned my opinion is based on logical reasoning and yours the latest right-on nonsense about how we should believe all accusations because.................................. well, I'm still waiting for a good reason for why we should be doing that.

Nope. Not consent. Look at it the other way. Melanie knew she had been refused sex at several points. You would think she would have looked for something more solid than lying still for consent at that point.

I have said consent needs to be actively given. Doing nothing is not giving consent I don't know how many times that needs to be repeated.

Hande hoche!

Seems Kevin Spacey has been accused of groping Scandinavian royalty.
http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-42284021

citytillidie

Not backing what the men have done but here is an example where people find it funny that a woman gropes a guys privates and they all laugh about it saying it is different even though they guy ended up blocking the girl from social media

siblers

Was watching The Apprentice during the week, one female contestant was taking measurements of a male model's trouser size, she was being super pervy and measured from his penis at one stage. It was only laughed off.

If a guy did the same to a woman, he'd be kicked off the show.

pitifulgod

siblers wrote: »

Was watching The Apprentice during the week, one female contestant was taking measurements of a male model's trouser size, she was being super pervy and measured from his penis at one stage. It was only laughed off.

If a guy did the same to a woman, he'd be kicked off the show.

It actually received a considerable amount of criticism online and in the media over it. One example below. Was trending on twitter.

http://amp.timeinc.net/nme/news/tv/apprentice-criticised-showing-objectification-male-models-2169273?source=dam&__twitter_impression=true

Biggest lickspittle on boardz

Disgraced publicist Max Clifford has died in prison. I wonder if he kept documents to be distributed after he died?
He would definitely know where the bodies are buried, so to speak:

https://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/britain/disgraced-publicist-max-clifford-dies-after-collapsing-in-jail-36394622.html