Morgan Freeman stared at woman's breasts.

Overheal

Olsky wrote: »

Oh. His career is over.

Nah. Hardly. So far we have proof of inappropriate comments and only when taken completely void of context.

In contrast, TJ Miller, according to a girl in college circa 2001, "became violent with her during a sexual encounter; he allegedly choked, shook, and punched her in the mouth, all without her consent." - while HBO immediately yanked him from Silicon Valley (great show with or without him tbh) he has still seen many returns, as recently as reprising his role in Deadpool 2 this past weekend, had been in Ready Player One and the Emoji Movie (bleh) and is still on the docket for How to Train Your Dragon 3, 6 months after the allegations surfaced... though recently Ryan Reynolds did confirm he won't be in the X-Force/Deadpool 3 movie, most likely because a couple weeks ago he was arrested for calling in a fake bomb threat on a train and faces up to 5 years in prison (really ****s up a production schedule). I'd say it's more to do with the bomb threat then the sexual assault allegation.

I think Morgan Freeman will be fine.

Dr Bolouswki

I understand power plays and the like from people in positions - but would most people not be able to get someone to back off with stern words? Like an incredulous "What are you doing? Are you fúcking high?" I think there's a difference between someone being a fúcking asshole - and someone being a fúcking criminal asshole. I kind of get the impression Freeman was being a dick who didn't realise he was being a dick, rather than an "abuser".

That said, I do feel that if someone knowingly does these things with the confidence no-one will question them because of their "status" and influence, they should get every fúcking thing that's coming to them.

Olsky

Dr Bolouswki wrote: »

I understand power plays and the like from people in positions - but would most people not be able to get someone to back off with stern words? Like an incredulous "What are you doing? Are you fúcking high?" I think there's a difference between someone being a fúcking asshole - and someone being a fúcking criminal asshole. I kind of get the impression Freeman was being a dick who didn't realise he was being a dick, rather than an "abuser".

That said, I do feel that if someone knowingly does these things with the confidence no-one will question them because of their "status" and influence, they should get every fúcking thing that's coming to them.

I'd appreciate it if you would watch the video below and let me know whether you consider these the actions of a fücking asshole on a power trip

Originally Posted by Olsky View Post
Clip of the reporter that wrote the article trying to justify her claim that the now infamous "Boy, do I wish I was there" comment is sexual harassment directed at her. And not a response to what Michael Caine had just said. Bear in mind as well that Freemans lawyers have videotape that clearly show that her claims of sexual harassment off camera were fictitious.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlOX6juGQVQ

Dr Bolouswki

ha ha - looks like he was replying to Caine's comment where he spoke of his embarresment. As for the "staring and looking up and down".. oh for ****'s sake. What a load of bollox. It doesn't look like anything at all to me! Maybe the little white lady was afraid of the black man?

anewme

Olsky wrote: »

Oh. His career is over. Sponsors have already deserted him. But with respect to whether "ogling" as you quaintly put it is acceptable or not in our society or should be punished severely as in this case, we have a fundamental difference of opinion.

if a celebrity wants a career and endorsements they can’t be an “”ogler”.

I don’t believe it should be punished by law, (gropers are different) oglers comes across as a bit pathetic and sad, definitely not a marketable commodity. But not much more than that.

ginandtonicsky

It's not socially acceptable or OK or un-noteworthy to be the "creepy uncle" anymore, in these post #metoo times, and that's what we're seeing here with Freeman.

It doesn't mean he should be conflated with the likes of Harvey Weinstein or Kevin Spacey or lumped in with actual criminal sexual assault cases and serial rapists, and that's where it gets murky. #metoo shouldn't be a catch-all for every type of mistreatment against women, because they are not all equal and they are not all illegal or prosecutable. They don't alter lives in the same way.

Show me a woman who has not met a creepy uncle type and I'll show you a liar. Freeman is one of the most famous actors on the planet and he rose to fame in 1970s/80s Hollywood, when these sorts of behaviour were tolerated and even expected and women just put up with it. We're no longer needing to put up with it. Which is great. But jesus if we start trying to call out these wrongs and lumping them in with serious sexual assault and rape it just lessens the seriousness of these crimes and their victims in my opinion.

And lads, having your breasts ogled or your body commented on non-stop by an 80 year old man, or any man for that matter, is pretty fcuking gross.

Bowlardo

Does he not mean he wishes he was there when Caine told the woman she was pregnant 50 years ago

Amprodude

I love breasts I could sit and watch them for hours especially the big ones

Donald Trump

Cleopatra_ wrote: »

I totally didn't read any of this thread.

I'm offended if someone doesn't stare at my tits.

Stare away Morgan, stare away.

Are they worth an oul' stare?

Cleopatra_

Donald Trump wrote: »

Are they worth an oul' stare?

What diddies aren't worth an 'oul stare?

Hooters, so they are.

professore

WTF there is nothing there at all. He didn't look her up and down and has a neutral expression on his face. It's obvious he wished he had been there when Caine had the embarrassing moment. If she thinks THAT is a sexual comment it's no wonder she gets "sexually harassed" all the time.

Seems to me like one of those women who thinks she is so hot that any comment or glance is sexual towards her. Horrible humourless bitches that need to be steered well clear of.

Her body language is screaming "I'm lying" too.

And she looks pretty flat chested to me. Not much there to stare at TBH.

dr.fuzzenstein

Amprodude wrote: »

I love breasts I could sit and watch them for hours especially the big ones

So does the man himself

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-IaRJnedtww

Donald Trump

Cleopatra_ wrote: »

What diddies aren't worth an 'oul stare?

Hooters, so they are.

Need accurate specifications in order to validate claims

DrWu

It's only a matter of time before some mad feminist sues some poor guy with aspergers for not cottoning on to all these new social rules they make up on what seems like a weekly basis.

sReq | uTeK

jesus christ, freeman says he wishes he was there to see michael caines embarrassment and that’s now implied to be sexual harassment.

The world is *****D

Donald Trump

sReq | uTeK wrote: »

jesus christ, freeman says he wishes he was there to see michael caines embarrassment and that’s now implied to be sexual harassment.

The world is *****D

???


The world is 8====D ?

Olsky

anewme wrote: »

if a celebrity wants a career and endorsements they can’t be an “”ogler”.

I don’t believe it should be punished by law,

DrWu wrote: »

It's only a matter of time before some mad feminist sues some poor guy with aspergers for not cottoning on to all these new social rules they make up on what seems like a weekly basis.

Oh. I think we're already there.

Man jailed for creepily staring at Glasgow pharmacy assistant.
Admitting the charge, the accused was sentenced to 70 days in prison

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15622122.Man_jailed_for_creepily_staring_at_Glasgow_pharmacy_assistant_through_window/


A man has appeared in court charged with staring at Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-24536996

anewme

Olsky wrote: »

Oh. I think we're already there.

Man jailed for creepily staring at Glasgow pharmacy assistant.
Admitting the charge, the accused was sentenced to 70 days in prison

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15622122.Man_jailed_for_creepily_staring_at_Glasgow_pharmacy_assistant_through_window/


A man has appeared in court charged with staring at Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-24536996

The Pharmacy guy was dangerous and a lunatic. I dont blame the police being cuncerned for her safety. I remember reading about they case before. Kiind of guy to have a knife. He seemed mentally ill. Safety is a priority. No offence but I don't think that's what Morgan Freeman is alleged to have done.

Olsky

anewme wrote: »

The Pharmacy guy was dangerous and a lunatic. I dont blame the police being cuncerned for her safety. I remember reading about they case before. Kiind of guy to have a knife. He seemed mentally ill. Safety is a priority. No offence but I don't think that's what Morgan Freeman is alleged to have done.

There is no indication that he was a dangerous lunatic. He did not have a knife or any weapon.
The crime of which he was charged and for which he was sentenced to jail was STARING.

The major accusation against Morgan Freeman is that he is guilty of STARING.

The allegations are not that different.

blinding

Could the women have traffic light system .

Green for Look

Amber for a sly sideways look .

Red for Poke your eyes out if a feminist take a breath .

anewme

Olsky wrote: »

There is no indication that he was a dangerous lunatic. He did not have a knife or any weapon.
The crime of which he was charged and for which he was sentenced to jail was STARING.

The major accusation against Morgan Freeman is that he is guilty of STARING.

The allegations are not that different.

The guy in Scotland was arrested and pleaded guilty to menacing behaviour not staring. He had his face pressed up against the window and was behaving in an intimidating fashion.

Man ran when approached by the police only to return when they went and was considered a risk to that lady's personal personal safety.

the man who hassled Nicola Sturgeon was similar.

More like stalking behaviour.

Both rightly convicted

Olsky

anewme wrote: »

The guy in Scotland was arrested and pleaded guilty to menacing behaviour not staring. He had his face pressed up against the window and was behaving in an intimidating fashion.

The menacing behaviour was STARING. Nothing else. He was found guilty of STARING in an intimidating fashion. And jailed for 70 days

"He was spotted walking past the pharmacy, again staring in towards the same counter assistant. The police arrived and arrested Yexley for the menacing behaviour.

Gravelly

anewme wrote: »

The guy in Scotland was arrested and pleaded guilty to menacing behaviour not staring. He had his face pressed up against the window and was behaving in an intimidating fashion.

Man ran when approached by the police only to return when they went and was considered a risk to that lady's personal personal safety.

the man who hassled Nicola Sturgeon was similar.

More like stalking behaviour.

Both rightly convicted

The only way you could be a bigger loser than being a stalker, is by being Nicola Sturgeons stalker.

anewme

Gravelly wrote: »

The only way you could be a bigger loser than being a stalker, is by being Nicola Sturgeons stalker.

It’s certainly strange but politicians (both male and female) have long since been the targets of nutcases.

Look at Jo Cox.

Police 100 % right to treat both of these incidents as alarming and dangerous.

It’s a bit different to “creepy uncle” behavior.

The One Doctor

Nearly crashed the car looking at diddies today.

Protip: Sunglasses.

Ronaldinho

The One Doctor wrote: »

Nearly crashed the car looking at diddies today.

Protip: Sunglasses.

A pro would have a dashcam and then watch it back in glorious 1080p.

blinding

Anybody know the rules ?

Are they written ?

Any rules for Women ?

Will feminists stick by the rules ? or if they can’t whinge fest will they want very abstract rules ?

anewme

This guys ogling Of boobs and passing comments have got him into big trouble. Possible loss of career.

http://www.ladbible.com/news/news-nurse-could-be-struck-off-for-pulling-fire-alarm-to-watch-breasts-20180530

blinding

anewme wrote: »

This guys ogling Of boobs and passing comments have got him into big trouble. Possible loss of career.

http://www.ladbible.com/news/news-nurse-could-be-struck-off-for-pulling-fire-alarm-to-watch-breasts-20180530

You’d think they would at least show the breasts !

How are we to know if it was worth it ?;)

Olsky

anewme wrote: »

This guys ogling Of boobs and passing comments have got him into big trouble. Possible loss of career.

http://www.ladbible.com/news/news-nurse-could-be-struck-off-for-pulling-fire-alarm-to-watch-breasts-20180530

Seems reasonable. Sounds a bit like what Paul Newman once said when asked why he was faithful to his wife " Why go out for a burger when you can have steak at home" Turned out later he went out for a lot of burgers.

When he was asked why he reportedly told a colleague she had a 'fine rump' he hit back saying that he was talking about the steak he would be having that evening.

"The conversation was around what individuals like to eat and drink and I recall me saying I drink Jack Daniel's and Amaretto and the fact that my wife was a vegan, but when I go out I will have a steak," he said.

dr.fuzzenstein

Not 100% specific to Mr Freeman.
To all the people who are now wondering "how much can I stare, am I allowed to to say if I can touch her bum, what are the exact rules?"

Well, it's easy. You don't stare, you don't grab and you don't ask them questions of a personal nature about their bodies or their sexual habits.
Not being a creep and a perv is very easy if you just follow these simple rules that, quite frankly, any moron can follow with a minimum amount of practice.
Or as a rule of thumb, treat women like human beings and the way you would like to be treated in return.
I really cannot understand what's so fcuking hard about that.
Just don't be a fcuking creep.

suicide_circus

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Not 100% specific to Mr Freeman.
To all the people who are now wondering "how much can I stare, am I allowed to to say if I can touch her bum, what are the exact rules?"

Well, it's easy. You don't stare, you don't grab and you don't ask them questions of a personal nature about their bodies or their sexual habits.
Not being a creep and a perv is very easy if you just follow these simple rules that, quite frankly, any moron can follow with a minimum amount of practice.
Or as a rule of thumb, treat women like human beings and the way you would like to be treated in return.
I really cannot understand what's so fcuking hard about that.
Just don't be a fcuking creep.

Is glancing ok?

pleas advice

Only if you're good looking.

The better you look, the more you see

alan partridge aha

Sunglasses should cover the staring issue.

Gravelly

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Well, it's easy. You don't stare

If staring wasn't allowed, I'd never have gotten married.

Men and women have stared at people they fancied since time immemorial - let's not get our knickers bunched up too tight here - staring isn't rape, whatever the feminists might tell you.

*EDIT* the "staring is rape" brigade wouldn't want to go to Italy, where the pre-dinner ritual of la passeggiata is basically where people stare at each other!

lanciadub

harry Bailey esq wrote: »

I thought that was Stevie Wonder?

Gold

valoren

It doesn't matter how rich and famous you are, some men can't interact coherently or competently with women they find attractive. It can come off as creepy but I'd hazard a guess that if the person initiating is good looking then their flirting faux pas would be chalked up as 'cute' alternatively if the person is not attractive, the exact same behavior is labelled creepy. Reminds me of Tiger Woods when he became famous, he became buddies with Michael Jordan, Charles Barkley et al and would go to night clubs with them. Woods was a bit of a shy, reserved geek and was astonished and curious at how his buddies had an easy rapport with and had beautiful women hanging off them. He solicited advice from Jordan as to how to in his own words "to talk to girls".

Jordan, uncomprehending and a bit taken aback, told him, to just go up to someone, anyone and simply say "Hello, I'm Tiger Woods". Job done.

Freeman ought to have done much the same i.e. just to be himself, the staring and the awkwardness would have been unnecessary. All he needed to do to was introduce himself.

"Hello, I'm Morgan Freeman"

And to illustrate how effective that would have been, I bet you read the above quote using his voice in your head.

facehugger99

I think staring at people while eating a banana is just really wrong.

Olsky

blinding wrote: »

Anybody know the rules ?

Are they written ?

Any rules for Women ?

Will feminists stick by the rules ? or if they can’t whinge fest will they want very abstract rules ?

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Not 100% specific to Mr Freeman.
To all the people who are now wondering "how much can I stare, am I allowed to to say if I can touch her bum, what are the exact rules?"

Well, it's easy. You don't stare, you don't grab and you don't ask them questions of a personal nature about their bodies or their sexual habits.
Not being a creep and a perv is very easy if you just follow these simple rules that, quite frankly, any moron can follow with a minimum amount of practice.
Or as a rule of thumb, treat women like human beings and the way you would like to be treated in return.
I really cannot understand what's so fcuking hard about that.
Just don't be a fcuking creep.

Gravelly wrote: »

If staring wasn't allowed, I'd never have gotten married.

Men and women have stared at people they fancied since time immemorial - let's not get our knickers bunched up too tight here - staring isn't rape, whatever the feminists might tell you.

(

valoren wrote: »

It doesn't matter how rich and famous you are, some men can't interact coherently or competently with women they find attractive. It can come off as creepy but I'd hazard a guess that if the person initiating is good looking then their flirting faux pas would be chalked up as 'cute' alternatively if the person is not attractive, the exact same behavior is labelled creepy.
.

There is a Victorian puritaism about the #metoo brigade that is deeply disturbing and is having a deeply negative effect on interactions between men and women. Equating staring with rape and saying there has to be rigid rules that govern any interactions between men and women with any touching, flirting or staring now forbidden because these are things that disrespect women has destroyed any spontaneity and left men terrified. And I think that it is incorrect to assume that all women are in favour of this new order.
Some women lliked being flirted with and admired. They didn't all automatically think that this was always sleazy or wrong. Or think that all interactions between men and women should only be through dating apps with informed consent and rigid rules.

anewme

Olsky wrote: »

There is a Victorian puritaism about the #metoo brigade that is deeply disturbing and is having a deeply negative effect on interactions between men and women. Equating staring with rape and saying there has to be rigid rules that govern any interactions between men and women with any touching, flirting or staring now forbidden because these are things that disrespect women has destroyed any spontaneity and left men terrified. And I think that it is incorrect to assume that all women are in favour of this new order.
Some women lliked being flirted with and admired. They didn't all automatically think that this was always sleazy or wrong. Or think that all interactions between men and women should only be through dating apps with informed consent and rigid rules.

There is a time and a place for everything.
Touching people or ogling people in work is just asking for trouble.

If someone needs to be told how to conduct themselves in a professional or even a social setting they should get some personal coaching.

The majority of people who just behave normallly, do not need this.

Its all alt right

anewme wrote: »

There is a time and a place for everything.
Touching people or ogling people in work is just asking for trouble.

If someone needs to be told how to conduct themselves in a professional or even a social setting they should get some personal coaching.

The majority of people who just behave normallly, do not need this.

It would need to be the right sort of coaching though. Full approval from The Board needed.

Why don't woman just meet us halfway on this and cover themselves head to toe. In fact we could kill two birds with the one stone if that happened.

Free to enjoy the local dishco and tunes in peace while ye wait outside for us.

jmayo

Gravelly wrote: »

If staring wasn't allowed, I'd never have gotten married.

Men and women have stared at people they fancied since time immemorial - let's not get our knickers bunched up too tight here - staring isn't rape, whatever the feminists might tell you.

*EDIT* the "staring is rape" brigade wouldn't want to go to Italy, where the pre-dinner ritual of la passeggiata is basically where people stare at each other!

Jaysus the Finns are truly fooked then.

Olsky

anewme wrote: »

If someone needs to be told how to conduct themselves in a professional or even a social setting they should get some personal coaching.

The majority of people who just behave normallly, do not need this.

Its all alt right wrote: »

It would need to be the right sort of coaching though. Full approval from The Board needed.

I think that is the whole agenda of #metoo. Men need to be retaught how to interact with women.
We need to be made aware of the new order. And of what is acceptable and what is forbidden.
Touching, staring and flirting are now inappropriate and unacceptable. I think that is exactly why they went after Morgan Freeman. Because that is all he hg as been accused and convicted of.
It is a deeply puritanical agenda and not that much different from what ISIS was trying to achieve in their society.

anewme

Olsky wrote: »

I think that is the whole agenda of #metoo. Men need to be retaught how to interact with women.
We need to be made aware of the new order. And of what is acceptable and what is forbidden.


Touching, staring and flirting are now inappropriate and unacceptable. I think that is exactly why they went after Morgan Freeman. Because that is all he hg as been accused and convicted of.
It is a deeply puritanical agenda and not that much different from what ISIS was trying to achieve in their society.

Its called personal responsibility.

The people asking here how they should behave clearly need help if they are asking? If they really want to know, then they need to re educate themselves. Its not my place or anyone elses to do so. If they haven't got the cop on or self awareness of how to conduct themselves in a working environment then they need to seek professional advice.

Morgan Freeman apologised for his actions - "clearly I was not coming across the way I intended". If you are concerned how you are coming across to the extent that you could lose your job, then it is prudent to take some responsibility for yourself.

If any man needs to be told he cant touch anyones skirt or make sexual comments in a working environment, then he needs to educate himself or he will get into trouble.

I wont be changing my dress sense just to suit someone who cant conduct themselves properly. If anyone pushes any boundaries with me, they will be told where to go in no uncertain terms. As I said earlier, the majority of people, men and women have a sense of Emotional Intelligence are able to behave normally and never have to worry about this type of crap.