Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Excusing Rape in the Name of Art
American Thinker ^ | 10/21/17 | Robin Ridless

Posted on 10/21/2017 4:00:20 AM PDT by markomalley

The most striking thing about the Harvey Weinstein revelations is the complete, almost syndicated, nature of the imputed wrongdoing. Seamlessness characterizes all successful cover-ups, but this one appears particularly sinister because narcissistic illusion was the participants’ stock-in-trade. It was also their Achilles heel.

According to reports, gorgeous, soigné women who affected tough, powerful personas on and off stage were, behind the scenes, belittled and overwhelmed by this monstrous overlord. Those who thwarted his advances were bought off. Others who weren’t bought off were silenced by collusive media. Still others were consigned to anonymity, abandoned to their own confusion. And still more others succumbed to a blended state of normalcy and moral unease, accepting professional favors and working with the man who had degraded them, probably wondering: Did that happen? It seems no accident that the film head married a fashion designer. With Weinstein able to force actresses on his payroll to wear his wife’s designs on the red carpet, he could burn his alpha-male brand onto the bodies of an even larger harem.

Everyone, underlings no less than, it is rumored, his own board of directors, were pimping for him, which must have been the point. I use “pimping” both in a corporate and sexual sense. Reportedly, Weinstein had a provision in his contract obligating him to pay for any consequences from his predations. I mean, what went down when private investors came a-courting? Was Weinstein listed as a potential liability? How did they cap the risk? By number of serial episodes per fiscal quarter? By the percentage of victims algorithmically projected to resist? Did the company take out Key-Man Insurance on Weinstein for the eventuality that is now upon them? …

(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

1 posted on 10/21/2017 4:00:20 AM PDT by markomalley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: markomalley

William Jefferson Weinstein


2 posted on 10/21/2017 4:18:02 AM PDT by fungoking (Tis a pleasure to live in the 0zarks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

I was trying out a job as a salesman. A woman running a business I visited essentially told me she’d buy a lot of product if I’d sleep with her. I was all of twenty-five and she was all of forty. I didn’t like the deal even though winning her account would have changed my career path, made me wealthy and able to retire in comfort. I never went back and eventually, my sales career went into the dustbin of history. Having her company as a client would have given me an intro to a large customer base, so this was significant.

While there is no excuse for scum like Harvey, for the most part the people involved had a choice. They can’t fault Harvey because they had sex with him and he gave them a shot at wealth and fame. Except for people he trapped and masturbated in front of, they made a choice. Now, coming out and calling him a monster is a bit disingenuous. At most, he was a John and they were the prostitute.


3 posted on 10/21/2017 4:26:32 AM PDT by Gen.Blather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gen.Blather

Would you have liked the deal if she was hot?


4 posted on 10/21/2017 4:49:21 AM PDT by bagster (Social Culture Warrior (SCW))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Gen.Blather

A lot of these women are or where very willing to take there clothes off and to preform or act like they were preforming sex acts for money.

In a movie why wouldn’t some one believe they wouldn’t be willing to do it to get a job.


5 posted on 10/21/2017 5:23:41 AM PDT by riverrunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
I said it before across multiple Weinstein articles, so I apologize for the repetition. However, I feel strongly that this is a golden opportunity to not "let a serious crisis go to waste." Except here, we're not being slimy collectivists, but upright citizens.

Mind you, I really do not like the idea of using the behavior of dirtbags and the tears of actresses/the misfortune of an innocent as a weapon against an enemy (to quote another Freeper). Real men would take these losers out back and beat some sense into them. I am also a free market capitalist and I don't want to regulate anything unless it is in line with the intent of the Founders.

All that said, we're dealing with the lowest of the low. If the Republicans had any sense of testicular fortitude - or a desire to MAGA for ALL individuals - they'd call a press conference and say:

"Democrats are clearly pro-misogyny. Silence equals consent. They said nothing while one of their fundraisers roamed as a sexual predator in Hollywood.

"It is sad that the loudest Democrat since this story broke has been Hillary Clinton, as she acknowledged that the Oval Office has seen a sexual predator - her husband.

"The Republican leadership asks the Democrats to stop treating the Second Amendment like Weinstein treats women, to reject Democrats' harboring of anti-woman fundraisers, and join us as we announce the start of hearings on this poisonous atmosphere in Hollywood, with an eye toward regulating studios and actors and actresses under the Commerce Clause as so many Democrats have with other parts of the economy."

Others have noted that the Republicans likely have skeletons in their closet and there is a risk in this approach. I agree, but maybe it's time to man-up and clean the Augean Stables. Frankly, I don't care if it's Hollywood or Wall Street or Main Street...this isn't the way real men act.

From Moses to St Joseph to men of fidelity throughout history, now is the time for Deplorables to reclaim the mantle of "compassion" from the statists, and expose their War on Women.

6 posted on 10/21/2017 5:31:30 AM PDT by DoodleBob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Reportedly, Weinstein had a provision in his contract obligating him to pay for any consequences from his predations.

That will come back to bite hard, b/c all the people that knew about this provision---even the lawyers who drew it up---are now material witnesses.

The moral vacuity and scummy depravity of Hollywood is writ large in such a provision....b/c nobody at the winestein Company had the decency to notify L/E that crimes were being committed by this peckered monster.

They should be charged w/ aiding and abetting.

7 posted on 10/21/2017 6:05:46 AM PDT by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Here, for your edification, are the Certified Democrat Degenerates......the scum that vilify and destroy America's Judeo-Christian ethics and values in movies promoted as being "diverse, politically correct, and socially relevant."

HOLLYWOOD'S CERTIFIED DEMOCRAT DEGENERATES
FINACED BILL CLINTON'S LEWINSKY SEX MESS

According to FEC Info, an Internet Web site (www.tray.com) that tracks federal political contributions, 176 individual donors actually contributed $10,000 or more to the lewinsky-era Clinton Legal Expense Trust fund through Dec 1999. Another 21 donors gave $10,000 in the first six months of 2000.

Thanks to Hollyood's generosity, a total of more than $2.2 million was raised in six months, which was notably more than was collected in funding during the previous four years of his presidency—combined.

Hollywood producers and stars made up the bulk of the most generous givers. They included:

<><> Universal Studios tycoon Lew Wasserman and his wife, Edith, who have given $60,000;

<><>DreamWorks trio Steven Spielberg, David Geffen and Jeffrey Katzenberg, $20,000 each;

<><> producer Ron Burkle and his wife, Janet, $40,000;

<><> producers Peg and Bud Yorkin, $30,000;

<><> TV producer Norman Lear, $20,000.

Entertainment celebrities and executives giving $10,000 included:

<><> singers Tony Bennett and Barbra Streisand;

<><> actors Michael Douglas and Tom Hanks;

<><> director Ron Howard; producer Gail Zappa;

<><>Black Entertainment Television founder Robert L. Johnson.

When Bill Clinton was at the height of the Monica Lewinsky sex scandal, Hollywood was by his side, offering donations for his legal fees, and one significant donor was a man who is now going through his own sex scandal—Harvey Weinstein.

Billionaire Harvey Weinstein raised $1,422,683 for federal candidates and political entities between 1990-2016. That’s small potatoes for his 27 years of rank Democratism, sucking up to feminism and upholding so-called abortion rights as he rampaged and assaulted young women. Adds up to about $5300 a year. Something tells me there are a lot of cash payments off-the-record being paid. (hat tip outpostinmass2)

Crunching the numbers as outpost did does give us a sharper look at the political money game as played by the conniving Clintons.

Harvey also gave a bundle to the nefarious tax-exempt Clinton Foundation and perhaps to offshoots of the Clintons tax-free entities.

Did Harvey's donations to the C/F go to "do-good projects"? Or did they make a circuitous route? Maybe landing back into the Clintons eternal political scams?

========================================

<><> Did Harvey's company list these payments as "business expenses?"

<><> How did the Hollyood elite list payments to Clinton's sex defense fund on their tax returns?

<><>How did the "DreamWorks" trio, Steven Spielberg, David Geffen and Jeffrey Katzenberg, list their 60,000 dollars to Clinton's sex defense fund?

8 posted on 10/21/2017 6:10:28 AM PDT by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Number of accusers are now over 50. That’s ~50 women who put up with it.

Pathetic.. so there’s ~50 women that were more worried about their career than their self respect. If you say nothing you condone it.

The guys an obvious scumbag but no sympathy here.


9 posted on 10/21/2017 6:21:08 AM PDT by maddog55 (After years of trying, you actually can't fix stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bagster

She was attractive but it was prostitution. Period.


10 posted on 10/21/2017 6:21:28 AM PDT by Gen.Blather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Liz

Thanks Liz for posting the info on Hollywood donors to Clinton’s own sexual predator defense fund. Very telling.


11 posted on 10/21/2017 6:58:36 AM PDT by Nevadan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Nevadan

It’s really an eye-opener after the legend of harvey.

Let’s keep that alive——the branding of the villains.


12 posted on 10/21/2017 7:13:40 AM PDT by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Nothing new here. The Romans used rape—and murder, torture, mutilation, and child abuse—for entertainment. And about half of the Americans are determined not to be outdone by them.


13 posted on 10/21/2017 7:24:45 AM PDT by Savage Beast (Those who want to repeat history try to prevent others from knowing it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

What nobody is willing to say is that this has been accepted as “the price of admission” for about 80 years now.

Its not like Hollywood has any virtue.


14 posted on 10/21/2017 7:34:55 AM PDT by G Larry (There is no great virtue in bargaining with the Devil)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: riverrunner

Does anyone remember the dress Rose McGowan wore to the VMA awards, when her date was Marilyn Manson? She was very nearly naked, google it. It’s really no wonder men in Hollywood thought she was just a cheap whore. She certainly dressed like it.


15 posted on 10/21/2017 9:06:26 AM PDT by tuffydoodle ("Never underestimate the total depravity of the average human being.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
As I said on another thread, plenty of his "victims" are now and have been for some time financially comfortable enough not to have to worry about being blackballed by him (Jolie, Paltrow, etc)... and they kept their traps shut right up until it was convenient to pile on him.

They were quite happy to benefit from their connection to him, principles be damned. "Pro-woman" frauds, every last one of them.

16 posted on 10/21/2017 9:56:18 AM PDT by Lizavetta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
"According to reports, gorgeous, soigné women who affected tough, powerful personas on and off stage were, behind the scenes, belittled and overwhelmed by this monstrous overlord. "

Soigné - definition:
polished and well-groomed; showing sophisticated elegance.

17 posted on 10/21/2017 10:22:04 AM PDT by Albion Wilde (I was not elected to continue a failed system. I was elected to change it. --Donald J. Trump)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Liz

This is the same Hollywood that was downright giddy when a priest or minister or republican caused scandal.
I remember a few years ago the Oscars were handing out awards to a film about the Boston Globe’s investigation of Catholic Church Scandal. There were somber speeches given about TRUTH, VICTIMS, and fighting INJUSTICE.
I’m guessing Harvey and his many enablers were in that audience applauding heartily.
How many scripts for movies & TV programs depict police convincing frightened victims to come forward so the perp won’t even hurt anyone else again.

One can only hope these people will show some ability to consider their hypocrisy in condemning the rest of America for not living up to their “woke” standards.
But I suspect they will keep on keeping on.
In fact I’ve already seen them congratulate each other for finally “speaking out” after remaining silent for decades.


18 posted on 10/21/2017 10:38:47 AM PDT by Scotswife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Scotswife

Harvey produced that film.


19 posted on 10/21/2017 4:13:13 PM PDT by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: maddog55

But hey, they got their precious little acting careers.


20 posted on 10/21/2017 4:15:43 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson