October 10, 2017

The New Yorker exposé of Harvey Weinstein hits.

"From Aggressive Overtures to Sexual Assault: Harvey Weinstein’s Accusers Tell Their Stories/Multiple women share harrowing accounts of sexual assault and harassment by the film executive," by Ronan Farrow.

I haven't seen Drudge put up his siren in a long time. The headline there is: "MAG: THREE WOMEN ACCUSE WEINSTEIN OF RAPE."

First, Farrow excuses the failure of journalists to report the stories that have surrounded Weinstein for more than 20 years:
This has been an open secret to many in Hollywood and beyond, but previous attempts by many publications, including The New Yorker, to investigate and publish the story over the years fell short of the demands of journalistic evidence. Too few women were willing to speak, much less allow a reporter to use their names, and Weinstein and his associates used nondisclosure agreements, monetary payoffs, and legal threats to suppress these myriad stories. Asia Argento, an Italian film actress and director, told me that she did not speak out until now––Weinstein, she told me, forcibly performed oral sex on her—because she feared that Weinstein would “crush” her. “I know he has crushed a lot of people before,” Argento said. “That’s why this story—in my case, it’s twenty years old, some of them are older—has never come out.”
The New Yorker story was scooped by the NYT, but Farrow says he's been working on it for 10 months. Presumably the NYT knew the New Yorker story was in the offing and got the jump on it, and Farrow stresses that he talked to 13 women, whose allegations "corroborate and overlap" with what was in the NYT and that he also has "far more serious claims."
Three women––among them Argento and a former aspiring actress named Lucia Evans—told me that Weinstein raped them, allegations that include Weinstein forcibly performing or receiving oral sex and forcing vaginal sex. Four women said that they experienced unwanted touching that could be classified as an assault. In an audio recording captured during a New York Police Department sting operation in 2015 and made public here for the first time, Weinstein admits to groping a Filipina-Italian model named Ambra Battilana Gutierrez, describing it as behavior he is “used to.” Four of the women I interviewed cited encounters in which Weinstein exposed himself or masturbated in front of them.


Farrow also talked to 4 actresses — including Mira Sorvino and Rosanna Arquette — who say that they rebuffed Weinstein and may have been retaliated against.
Farrow says he talked to 16 "former and current executives and assistants at Weinstein’s companies" who said they had seen or knew about sexual assaults by Weinstein. Farrow says there was "a culture of complicity" within these companies, and that employees participated in "subterfuge" to make a young woman feel safe in a meeting and then leave her alone with Weinstein.

There follow detailed descriptions of rape, showing the tactics Weinstein used. You can go to the link to read that. Excerpt:

“It was like it was just another day for him,” [Lucia] Evans said. “It was no emotion.” Afterward, she said, he acted as if nothing had happened. She wondered how Weinstein’s staff could not know what was going on.... [T]he entire sequence of events had a routine quality. “It feels like a very streamlined process,” she said. “Female casting director, Harvey wants to meet. Everything was designed to make me feel comfortable before it happened. And then the shame in what happened was also designed to keep me quiet.”

Evans said that, after the incident, “I just put it in a part of my brain and closed the door.” She continued to blame herself for not fighting harder. “It was always my fault for not stopping him,” she said. “I had an eating problem for years. I was disgusted with myself. It’s funny, all these unrelated things I did to hurt myself because of this one thing.”...

[Asia] Argento said that, in 1997, one of Weinstein’s producers invited her to what she understood to be a party thrown by Miramax... When the producer led her upstairs that evening, she said, there was no party—only a hotel room, empty but for Weinstein: “I’m, like, ‘Where is the fucking party?’ ”...  At first, Weinstein was solicitous, praising her work. Then he left the room. When he returned, he was wearing a bathrobe and holding a bottle of lotion. “He asks me to give a massage. I was, like, ‘Look man, I am no fucking fool,’ ” Argento said. “But, looking back, I am a fucking fool. And I am still trying to come to grips with what happened.... The thing with being a victim is I felt responsible... Because if I were a strong woman, I would have kicked him in the balls and run away. But I didn’t. And so I felt responsible.”...
Mira Sorvino, who starred in several of Weinstein’s films, told me that he sexually harassed her and tried to pressure her into a physical relationship while they worked together.... Sorvino said that she struggled for years with whether to come forward with her story, partly because she was aware that it was mild compared to the experiences of other women, including another actress she spoke to at the time.....
The audio recording (embedded above) exists because Gutierrez went to the police and agreed that she "would wear a wire and attempt to extract a confession or incriminating statement." With that recording, why wasn't Weinstein charged with a crime?
“We had the evidence,” the police source involved in the operation told me. “It’s a case that made me angrier than I thought possible, and I have been on the force a long time.”
There's the story of Rosanna Arquette:
[W]hen she arrived at the [hotel] room, Weinstein opened the door wearing a white bathrobe. Weinstein said that his neck was sore and that he needed a massage. She told him that she could recommend a good masseuse. “Then he grabbed my hand,” she said. He put it on his neck. When she yanked her hand away, she told me, Weinstein grabbed it again and pulled it toward his penis, which was visible and erect. “My heart was really racing. I was in a fight-or-flight moment,” she said. She told Weinstein, “I will never do that.”

Weinstein told her that she was making a huge mistake by rejecting him, and named an actress and a model who he claimed had given in to his sexual overtures and whose careers he said he had advanced as a result. Arquette said she told him, “I’ll never be that girl,” and left.

Arquette said that after she rejected Weinstein her career suffered....

313 comments:

1 – 200 of 313   Newer›   Newest»
Bill, Republic of Texas said...

That Ronan Farrow. Mia and Frank Sinatra's kid.

He would know where the bodies are buried.

eric said...

I have a really hard time believing this stuff.

I want to. Because these people in Hollywood are despicable.

But at this point anyone can come forward and get their 15 minutes of fame. If it were actresses and models and such, like Jennifer Lawrence, then maybe I could believe it. But now that this has come out and now they all come out? I find it tough to believe.

I get the argument that rape is embarrassing and women don't want to come out because of that stigma.

But that's not my experience. I grew up in the 80s and it seemed like almost every drinking party every weekend there was someone telling their story of being raped to an adoring, loving, listening, attentive crowd. I never shared my own personal story because male rape is embarrassing. But there always seemed to be a never ending string of women willing to recount their tale at these parties.

Now today, I'm older and not embarrassed by something that wasn't my fault. And no one shames me. I don't feel any stigma at all by admitting or talking about something that happened to me.

So, I remain skeptical. And while I get that some of these women would remind silent for their careers, I find that despicable. Not a reasonable excuse. Because of he raped you, he will rape someone else. And your silence allows him to continue raping. Your cowardice means more victims.

Assrat said...

>But at this point anyone can come forward and get their 15 minutes of fame.

I wouldn't be at all surprised to find out that some of the accusations are untrue.

But that's the nature of the best. "Sure, I harassed those four women but not the fifth" really isn't all that convincing.

eric said...

Blogger Assrat said...
>But at this point anyone can come forward and get their 15 minutes of fame.

I wouldn't be at all surprised to find out that some of the accusations are untrue.

But that's the nature of the best. "Sure, I harassed those four women but not the fifth" really isn't all that convincing.


In a weird way, the fact that he isn't a politician makes their accusations more believable. These days it seems like some people will do or say anything to take down politicians that they hate.

Ann Althouse said...

I'm deleting comments that are about the number of posts about Weinstein.

Please address the new article in The New Yorker, the actual substance of it.

We know who Ronan Farrow is, but The New Yorker has put its reputation behind this story, so I don't want to see comments that just talk about Farrow.

Rick said...

In the meeting, Evans recalled, “he immediately was simultaneously flattering me and demeaning me and making me feel bad about myself.”

Weinstein uses the neg. I suspect it's more effective coming from the person who decides whether you appear on Project Runway or not.

Ann Althouse said...

Note to Now I Know: You need to stop doing what I've been deleting and change your style of commenting. If you do not, we will be deleting everything you write, without reading what it is. Change now or be on the permanent shit list.

Ann Althouse said...

Please base comments on the linked article.

I will be deleting material that isn't about the article. It makes the comments thread unreadable. The first 20 comments are so are very important to how a discussion will go.

rcocean said...

Non-disclosure agreements? They don't cover crimes.

DKWalser said...

If the police had that admission on tape, why wasn't he prosecuted? Others have be indited on less evidence.

chickelit said...

I think it's important that truthful stories come out. However, this being Hollywood, and people needing 15+ minutes of fame, there are bound to be exaggerations and falsifications. How to distinguish them? The public will believe anything at this point.

Perhaps an updated Arthur Miller/The Crucible will emerge out of this, Hollywood needs better writing.

Now I Know! said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bay Area Guy said...

From the New Yorker:

"Four of the women I interviewed cited encounters in which Weinstein exposed himself or masturbated in front of them."

I thought Harvey would stop doing this! Jeez, abusing a poor potted plant at the Cafe Socialista, and now this too?

When will this madness end?

eric said...

That audio is really hard to listen to.

He uses a lot of pressure tactics to, presumably, get her into the room with him. From the conversation, it seems they are in the hallway. And he accuses her of making a scene and embarrassing him. Several tricks someone might use to put pressure on your psyche to conform. And it comes out of him in what seems to be a natural, if urgent, way.

Almost like it's rehearsed.

Or, as though he has done it before.

rcocean said...

Weinstein wasn't prosecuted in one sexual harassment case and he later gave $10,000 to the NYC DA who dropped the case.

Remember the French Socialist pol who made of habit of raping women (or taking them by force) and all the Left-wing Gals just let it slide, because y'know they wanted to take one for the team?

It seems a lot Liberal women are like that. Part of its fear, part of its self-interest, part of its just being a Leftist.

Darryl Thomas said...

Ronan,

I GET it. Yes, you want everyone to know the actresses actually talked to YOU. News flash: that’s kinda, like, Journalism 101. Take a class or, at least, hire an editor… After the 34th “told me” quote your writing just got a mite repetitive…

Bay Area Guy said...

Harvey's (highly) paid spokeswoman:

“Any allegations of non-consensual sex are unequivocally denied by Mr. Weinstein. Mr. Weinstein has further confirmed that there were never any acts of retaliation against any women for refusing his advances. Mr. Weinstein obviously can’t speak to anonymous allegations, but with respect to any women who have made allegations on the record, Mr. Weinstein believes that all of these relationships were consensual....

The potted plant begs to differ.

Nonapod said...

I always try to remain skeptical at first. But like the Cosby thing, at some point the shear volume of accusers with detailed accounts becomes overwhelming. Yeah, you could argue it could still be opportunistic people just jumping on an accusation band wagon in hopes of some kind of lawsuit payout, but when combined things like the police sting and other peripheral hearsay and innuendo it becomes more and more difficult to disbelieve.

eric said...

Blogger DKWalser said...
If the police had that admission on tape, why wasn't he prosecuted? Others have be indited on less evidence.


If you are talking about this audio, I would say it would be tough to get his admission of grabbing her breast as an admission of rape.

He does appear to admit it, but I would imagine a decent lawyer could explain it away as, he didn't even hear what she said, he was too busy trying to reassure her and get her out of the hallway and into the room.....

rcocean said...

That's a great line.

"Hey, don't ruin your friendship with me for five minutes"

rcocean said...

But wait, didn't Harvey said "He would never see her again, if she gave him five minutes"?

What about the "Great Friendship?"

AJ Lynch said...

I guess old Harvey will need a team of lawyers to fend off criminal charges and lawsuits filed by victims being represented by Gloria Allred. How funny is that to be sued by the mother of your own former lawyer, Lisa Bloom?

Lastly, these people seem to deserve each other. The casting couch is real and most people know that.

rcocean said...

Oh, that Breast thing? I was just reaching for my drink.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

ok I read the article.
Big wealthy intimidating powerful star-maker movie mogul likes to force himself on women.
Why didn't these women go to the police?
career. Why didn't an A-list feminist democrat celebrity do something?

rcocean said...

Money is the least of Weinstein's problems. He's got $150 million. Even if he pays out $50 Million in lawsuits, he's still got $100 million.

He's got more money than he can use.

Fritz said...

From the New Yorker:

"Four of the women I interviewed cited encounters in which Weinstein exposed himself or masturbated in front of them."

I thought Harvey would stop doing this! Jeez, abusing a poor potted plant at the Cafe Socialista, and now this too?


I want someone with serious video editing skills to put Weinstein behind one the fern in the famous "Obama between two ferns" video.

DKWalser said...

I don't find Weinstein's behavior incredible. What I have a hard time fathoming is that so many in the media knew about what he was doing and kept silent -- while they were busy ruining the lives of other men over behavior that seems tame compared to what we've learned about Weinstein. It's as if they didn't see sexual harassment as a real problem but as a tool for destroying those they disagreed with. What else explains it?

Clarence Thomas was a villain who shouldn't be allowed on the Supreme Court for telling dirty jokes. Bill Clinton? Crickets. Bill O'Reily was a cad who should be run out of polite society. Weinstein? Cover up far worse behavior for him until it can no longer be concealed (or he's no longer of use).

traditionalguy said...

Lust is a many splendered thing. Harvey wanted her like the eternal college Frat guy at a party in Animal House. That is also Bill Clinton to a T. So Hillary had a good reason to hate the 1960s males who seemed to have some political power, and just used it to get targeted young women into bed... Hard to get women like Hillary Rodham

But Donna Karan says all is fair since the women dressed as targets. And the side bar on the Daily Mail had 10+ semi nude women stars going out to be photographed.

madAsHell said...

Wow!! He was set up. I think I hear the woman claiming an earlier rendezvous made her uncomfortable. She brought a cell phone the second time, and recorded the whole thing.

The audio is very clear. I wonder if she concealed the phone, or just held it in her hand while Harvey indicted himself. Also notice, she didn't walk away immediately.

Rae said...

So did Weinstein have an actual rape expense account? Apparently he had a victim recruiter in Italy. I wonder what his rape budget was.

"Dammit, I can't rape you today. Over budget. Oh, and you don't get the part."

Curious George said...

That recording is both ugly, and pathetic. One second he is demanding and threatening, the next he is begging.

He should do the right thing and swallow a barrel.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

All the digging into Trump

In October, 2016, a month before the election, a tape emerged of Trump telling a celebrity-news reporter, “And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. . . . Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything.”

If allegations against Weinstein are true - this wasn't merely bragging trash-talk about women. Harvey Weinstein raped them. Intimidated them. Will dedicated leftists admit the difference? No.

robother said...

Ronan Farrow and the New Yorker don't find Harvey's $10,000 contribution to NY DA CY Vance Jr. election at all relevant to the decision not to prosecute, or even worth mentioning.

Annie C said...

I am lately bothered by this non-disclosure agreement. I can see asking for non-disclosure of the recipe for Coca Cola or new coding on a game engine.

But it seems to me that paying someone that you did something to and then saying they can't talk about it is paying for their silence. Unseemly.

I know it's done all the time. Does the entire concept of using a contract to shut a person up bother anyone else?

Hagar said...

It strikes me that Jane Goodall may be the most insightful person to ask about Weinstein's behavior, though explaining ours may well be beyond even Goodall.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Where were all the so-called protectors of the weak?

Where was Meryl Streep?

Fernandinande said...

she did not speak out until now

It's best to wait until lots of other people report that they have also seen Goody Osburn with the Devil.

Bay Area Guy said...

So, in recent weeks, we've had Hugh Hefner, Anthony Weiner and Harvey Weinstein.

Any commmon denominators? (I chuckle).

You know it's a sordid trio, if the least offensive is Hefner, the 90-year old man, walking around in a bathrobe.

To my knowlege, Hef has never been accused of rape or sexual harassment. These disposable bunnies, for some reason, just flock to him.

Weiner had a hot Muslim wife, who wouldn't put out, so he resorted to sexting minors. Not good.

Harvey has a hot wife too! (Georgina Chapman). But for some reason he is wanking off in potted plants at restaurants, trying to coax shower massages out of aspiring actresses, and now raping a few. Not good.

Why are these powerful Leftwing men so backwards about sex?

Didn't they ever learn anything from Frank Sinatra? (his songs, not his antics)

Some day, when I'm awfully low
When the world is cold
I will feel a glow just thinking of you
And the way you look tonight

Yes, you're lovely, with your smile so warm
And your cheeks so soft
There is nothing for me but to love you
And the way you look tonight

With each word your tenderness grows
Tearin' my fear apart
And that laugh wrinkles your nose
Touches my foolish heart

Quayle said...

We live in a world in which morality is nothing more than a club with which you beat your enemies and opponents.

sakredkow said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
rhhardin said...

Wait, did that end "I wanna leave" "Fine"

tcrosse said...

These disclosures follow in the wake of stories alleging sexual misconduct by public figures, including Bill O’Reilly, Roger Ailes, Bill Cosby, and Donald Trump.

But not including Bill Clinton.

rhhardin said...

It's a really bad seduction attempt. Apparently he's not good with women, at least I'd suppose not.

rhhardin said...

Jeez, women, can't you say no and walk out? Say you're no good at tact.

Rae said...

These disclosures follow in the wake of stories alleging sexual misconduct by public figures, including Bill O’Reilly, Roger Ailes, Bill Cosby, and Donald Trump.

But not including Bill Clinton.


Or Anthony Weiner, Bob Menendez or Jeffrey Epstein.

I wonder, did Weinstein ever party on Pedo Island with Epstein and Clinton?

rhhardin said...

There's a dystopian movie to be made about when women's preferences become law.

rhhardin said...

It was a sting? They didn't bring charges why? Nothing happened, is why. They were hoping for force. No force.

Rae said...

They didn't bring charges why?

He paid off the prosecutor, oh *cough* he made a contribution to his reelection campaign.

rhhardin said...

Therapy would teach Weinstein to become interested in something the woman is interested in, for starters.

Curious George said...

"eric said...

I get the argument that rape is embarrassing and women don't want to come out because of that stigma.

But that's not my experience. I grew up in the 80s and it seemed like almost every drinking party every weekend there was someone telling their story of being raped to an adoring, loving, listening, attentive crowd. I never shared my own personal story because male rape is embarrassing. But there always seemed to be a never ending string of women willing to recount their tale at these parties.

Now today, I'm older and not embarrassed by something that wasn't my fault. And no one shames me. I don't feel any stigma at all by admitting or talking about something that happened to me.

So, I remain skeptical. And while I get that some of these women would remind silent for their careers, I find that despicable. Not a reasonable excuse. Because of he raped you, he will rape someone else. And your silence allows him to continue raping. Your cowardice means more victims."

Odd that you find women who stay quiet to preserve their jobs "despicable" but it's okay for you because you were "embarrassed."

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

Isn't the Disney CEO talking of running for president. Anyone ask him if he knew what was going on. Most of these allegations occurred when Weinstein was at Disney.

I hope the Disney guy is a Dem because if he is a Repub his run just died.

rhhardin said...

Charges of what? Really stupid approach?

Sex ed classes apparently are skipping this these days.

Hagar said...

The Donald was absolutely right about what you can get away with in Hollywood if you are a producer, wasn't he?

rhhardin said...

It used to be that men's sex advice lore was how to seduce without being seduced.

That was the old style playboy.

Greg Hlatky said...


$10,000? Isn't that reportable?

rhhardin said...

Hey wanna fuck? works too, because you save time with each candidate and eventually run into one that says yes.

There's no reason to use the approach if you're going to spend 15 minutes with each one, though. It would take forever.

Fernandinande said...

rhhardin said...
Wait, did that end "I wanna leave" "Fine"


Yup, just after "Yesterday was too much for me [so I came back today]!"

His whiny wheedling was pitiful, but still not as bad as the gold diggers and don't-wanna-be-crushed greedy cowards crawling out of the woodwork.

rhhardin said...

google for $10,000...

What $10,000

rhhardin said...

As I recall Lauren Silvan said he was physically blocking her passage out before he started masturbating in front of her. He's a big man. Someone who's acting like that, who knows what they'll do to you if you try to walk through them.

I doubt the masturbation. Physiologically it makes no sense. A woman would not know that, a guy would.

Masturbating in front of her in a private space isn't a crime but blocking her exit is kidnapping. Charge him with the right thing, if that's what happened.

MadisonMan said...

The New Yorker has put its reputation behind this story

Do they have a Reputation? Are they actually held in High Regard these days?

I'm curious immediately: Why is Nineteen-Nineties spelled out, but 2015 is not?

Am I foolish for suggesting that NDAs are also a nice way to control these women? Make them believe they can't talk about it at risk of losing....what, exactly? As soon as the Genie is out of the bottle, it's not like Weinstein could've done much.

I agree with a link from yesterday -- if Hillary were President, this story would still be bottled up.

DKWalser said...

Charges of what? Really stupid approach?

He admitted to groping. That rises above the level of a stupid or obnoxious approach. I guess we're back in to the Bill Clinton rules of behavior where every guy is entitled to one free feel, and, if she doesn't object, fine. If she does, it's still fine as long as he stops.

eric said...

Odd that you find women who stay quiet to preserve their jobs "despicable" but it's okay for you because you were "embarrassed."

You are mistaken. I didn't stay quiet. I told my parents because I was 8 years old. They told the police.

You are confusing two different things. Not telling the police/authorities vs talking about it at parties.

I stayed quiet at parties because it was a decade plus later and no one knew this individual and he could have been dead at this point. He wasn't a local official, producer, director, etc.

So, speaking out to friends at parties for attention is much different than reporting to the authorities.

I hope I cleared that up.

And to be even more clear, I have nothing but contempt for those who stay quiet. If I can speak up at 8 years old, then adults have ZERO excuse.

Bay Area Guy said...

Joking aside, the article is pretty powerful.

Weinstein is a predator. Not in a phony, Hollywood, Jack the Ripper sense, but in a real abuser of power sense. He tried to sexually harass famous actresses, Mira Sorvino and Rosanna Arquette, who had the status to say No. But the unknown actresses felt compelled to surrender under fear and duress -- and fear that he would quash their careers.

They guy should not just be fired, but should be in jail. And, the civil suits for battery, rape and sexual assault should be filed pronto.



rhhardin said...

Groping is assault, so charge that crime.

DKWalser said...

Masturbating in front of her in a private space isn't a crime but blocking her exit is kidnapping. Charge him with the right thing, if that's what happened.

Ever heard of indecent exposure? It's a crime in most places.

rhhardin said...

but in a real abuser of power sense

Very important. There is no such thing as power. Making it a noun makes it something you can have, gain, lose, take away. There's no such thing.

Like a reification error such as phlogiston, the cause of fire. They spent years looking for it.

Power is a thoughtless conglomeration of auctoritas, imperium, officium and potestas.

Google and select one at a time and try to apply it to the situation.

rhhardin said...

Indecent exposure in a private space isn't indecent exposure.

rhhardin said...

You're going on whatever-makes-women-uncomfortable rules. It can't be law.

MadisonMan said...

Jeez, women, can't you say no and walk out? Say you're no good at tact.

We don't hear about the maybe many women who may have done that.

I wonder how many of the women who were trapped with him ignored the little nagging voice in the back of their head saying "Don't go into a room with this guy."

Listen to your inner voice!

Original Mike said...

"... previous attempts by many publications, including The New Yorker, to investigate and publish the story over the years fell short of the demands of journalistic evidence."

What a self-serving, steaming pile of horse crap. I'm remembering a front-page spread by the NYT of a bogus charge John McCain was having an affair during his 2008 Presidential campaign.

Do these people actually believe the crap they feed us? Do they delude themselves that we believe it?

exhelodrvr1 said...

That was a good column. I wonder if anyone is working on something similar about Bill Clinton?

rhhardin said...

The crimes he's committed aren't being charged because they don't support the desired conclusion, that men are pigs and it's got to stop.

The best you can get is don't kidnap, don't assault, don't rape. Not general enough for the mob. Everybody already knew that.

rhhardin said...

It's not a public problem if women are uncomfortable.

If you can't deal with it, stay indoors.

The Cracker Emcee Activist said...

Hmm, don't think he's gonna be taking the NRA down anytime soon.

Laslo Spatula said...

The Asia Argento story sticks out to me as Harvey's view of Power.

It is one thing to pressure a woman into sucking your cock.

It is another to place your face, unwanted, in her vagina.

THAT is Intimacy.

That is Control.

I am Laslo.

tds said...

Author recalls Roger Ailes, Bill O'Reilly, and Donald Trump. I'm starting to get an impression that if not for Donald Trump and Fox News, Harvey Weinstein would be left untroubled to continue to do whatever he was doing last 3 decades. So there we have it, there is an upside in having Fox News and DJT.

exiledonmainstreet said...

I wonder if Weinstein will decide to take a few others with him now that he's going down (pun not intended). People were afraid of him for a reason. I'm sure he wasn't the only powerful pig in Hollywood. There must be at least a few there who are wetting themselves right now.

Gee, for once the talk of Tinseltown isn't the ongoing "Who hates Trump the most?" contest. Look to your own backyard, you vapid morons.

CStanley said...

Wait, did that end "I wanna leave" "Fine"

Yup, just after "Yesterday was too much for me [so I came back today]!"

His whiny wheedling was pitiful, but still not as bad as the gold diggers and don't-wanna-be-crushed greedy cowards crawling out of the woodwork.


I have mixed feelings about the actresses (and assume it really is mixed, with some individuals basically prostituting themselves while others probably at least try to stay above this.) But in the case of the young woman on the tape, she met with him a second time as part of a sting operation, and the only reason it didn't escalate further is that she got cold feet and decided not to enter his hotel room.

Ralph L said...

Can we dissect the whole apparatus of fixers and enablers (on payroll and off) next? Ranting and threatening isn't squat without accomplices.

He should do the right thing and swallow a barrel.
Please let Diogenes out first.

eric said...

What a self-serving, steaming pile of horse crap

Any sexual harrassment story regarding a republican is immediately confirmed by the fact that they are Republicans.

madAsHell said...

I wonder what he did to make her uncomfortable during the first visit? Get naked?

In some sense, this is about a guy that couldn't, or didn't know how to satisfy a woman.

Amadeus 48 said...

The problem here is not the victims. The problem is Harvey.

It is one thing to pursue classic courtship behavior where whatever happens is something that is mutually consented to with some human connection that transcends the commercial marketplace, even if later regretted. Consider Don Juan (or Don Giovanni, if you prefer). He is a cad, but his apparent motives are those of romance and seduction--a human connection, however fleeting. He of course is an egoist who literally ends up in Hell.

Harvey, the movie mogul, the big man, is holding out a different incentive: I can kill your career or I can make you a star. Just be my plaything for five minutes.

Why should anyone be put in that position, female or male? It isn't seduction, it isn't courtship. It's commerce. Harvey should have hired hookers. He was using his power and position instead of his bankroll. But he was also soiling people who did not deserve it.

This is a really sad story. Sad for the victims for sure. But also sad for Harvey, who obviously has many talents.

William said...

I read the article. Weinstein is truly despicable, worse than Cosby. This isn't horndog stuff but truly evil crap. I hope he gets jail time, but he'll probably die in bed, and the bed will be in a luxury mansion.......Theres no coming back from this article. All the people who gave their love and support to Harvey look very bad indeed.

Assrat said...

>In a weird way, the fact that he isn't a politician makes their accusations more believable.

It certainly removes an obvious motivation to lie.

But yeah, at this point it's a mess. He's being accused by a lot of women. Some are probably lying. Some are telling the truth. Some went along with it, resented him silently, and are now minimizing their own blame.

John Lynch said...

Bill Clinton. When?

tcrosse said...

Dear Colleague:
Bring him in front of the Title IX compliance committee and expel his ass.

alan markus said...

Mia Farrow: This has been an open secret to many in Hollywood and beyond, but previous attempts by many publications, including The New Yorker, to investigate and publish the story over the years fell short of the demands of journalistic evidence

Wonder if Rolling Stone magazine passed on it for that reason, or because it was some kind of "New York" thing to not publish it.

Paging Jann Wenner!!

jaydub said...

I have it on good authority that the reported instances of Weinstein's masturbating in front of various women were just misunderstandings. Supposedly it went like this: his fly worked itself open to the point where his manhood happened to fall out. Naturally being embarrassed by the situation, he stuffed it back in his pants. Unfortunately, every time he stuffed it back it fell right back out again before he could zip up his fly. This continued for a couple of dozen cycles while he furiously tried to get the situation in hand. These women apparently had very active imaginations which caused them to misinterpret the back and forth actions of his hands as masturbation. Certainly, this misinterpetation was likely reinforced by his secretary's having accidentally spilled a few ounces of French vanilla coffee creamer on these ladies as she was serving them coffee just as Harvey was finally successful in zipping his fly. Frankly, this was apparently just female hysteria about something that could have happened to anybody, particularly in Hollywood.

And you'll never believe how the ridiculous oral sex accusations came about.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Brain Ross at ABC news is unclear about this "must pass journalistic evidence" that only applies to Demofatcats.

The Cracker Emcee Activist said...

So that's two rapists Hillary has enabled. She is one sick broad.

The Cracker Emcee Activist said...

Funny that Weinstein initially tried to pass this off as a vast right-wing conspiracy. I wonder if other sexual predators have got away with using that schtick?

CStanley said...

Bill Clinton is like the Voldemort of sexual predators.

Be said...

It was an interesting, though long article. The excuse given about how this was never exposed is kind of interesting, though:

"This has been an open secret to many in Hollywood and beyond, but previous attempts by many publications, including The New Yorker, to investigate and publish the story over the years fell short of the demands of journalistic evidence. Too few women were willing to speak, much less allow a reporter to use their names..."

Didn't seem that anyone had problems with "falling short of the demands of journalistic evidence" when publishing on 'rape' cases at various universities over the past few years.

Of course, the students being unfairly / falsely accused weren't Harvey Weinstein.

***

Off to read that article on the Title IX suits schools are having to deal with after the rape accusers didn't get 'satisfaction.'

cubanbob said...

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...
All the digging into Trump

In October, 2016, a month before the election, a tape emerged of Trump telling a celebrity-news reporter, “And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. . . . Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything.”

Once again Trumpy was simply telling the truth, the truth about Hollywood.

Bay Area Guy said...

@rhardin,

Very important. There is no such thing as power. Making it a noun makes it something you can have, gain, lose, take away. There's no such thing.

Strongly disagree. There is power and it is wielded. Sometimes justly, sometimes unjustly.

If your livelihood depends on the good graces of Person X, and Person X requests you to do something stupid, unwise, unpleasant and dishonest, sometimes you do it.

That's power.

mezzrow said...

We need a poll, Althouse. Is this a situation where everybody with a pulse knew that Weinstein was this horrible dick of a man and a rapist to boot for decades and he's just getting older and weaker. Now it's just time to cull him out because everyone really hates him anyway? AND/OR For some reason, the current pilots of mass popular culture feel that this sacrifice will help mollify the beast at the door on both left and right. A gender issue is available because it appears he saved his sexual abuse for women. Wrapping themselves in defense of the gender at this point may provide some insulation from the burn through in the already weakened pop culture. His films were actually pretty good, especially when you compare them with the bulk of what's offered today. Another horrible rich powerful white man in the headlines.

Ralph L said...

I tuned out most of the campaign last year, so the impression I got was that Trump said he'd done the grabbing. In fact, he just said the ugly truth about "stars", minus the flip side "if you want to be a star, you'll let someone grab your pussy and more."

Amadeus 48 said...

Re: the silence of the comics.

Remember the Saint David Letterman had is own schtupping pad paid for by CBS where he broke in the new talent.

Let's not forget Dave Letterman.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Amadeus 48 @ 11:28

Thank you.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Isn’t one of the Alinsky rules to force your opponent to live up to his own set of rules, because your opponent will find it impossible to do so? Well, Hollywood is now being forced to live up to the leftist rule that “women who claim to have been raped or assaulted should always be believed, because it’s an insult to all women to think that any woman would lie about such a thing.” Well, of course unless they are Republicans or nobodies like Juanita Broaderick. But famous, liberal Hollywood women? That’s different. Hollywood has Alinskied itself.

Titus said...

I just read this, how weird. NYT obviously scooped the New Yorker. The audio is chilling.

Assrat said...

>Very important. There is no such thing as power.

There is a race of intelligent carrots on another planet who have better insight into human behavior.

Rick said...

MadisonMan said...
The New Yorker has put its reputation behind this story
Do they have a Reputation?


This is a better article than the NYT report.

tds said...
I'm starting to get an impression that if not for Donald Trump and Fox News, Harvey Weinstein would be left untroubled to continue to do whatever he was doing last 3 decades.


The left has to pursue this or their accusations against Fox are revealed as partisan. Those on the left who really care took advantage of this circumstance to overpower the rest. There's a reason this is coming out now and not a year ago even though everyone has known this. I don't pay much attention to Hollywood but even I've heard this over the last 5 years or so. I don't believe Streep et al for a second.

I do think it's unfair to criticize someone like Jessica Chastain who had heard about Weinstein but didn't say anything pubblicly. What was she supposed to say? She heard from someone that unnamed other people were harassed and/or assaulted? the best you can do is repeat the warnings to other newbies as someone did for her.

You can't make accusations on behalf of other people.

Wilbur said...

"Groping is assault, so charge that crime."

"Indecent exposure in a private space isn't indecent exposure."

You know a lot about a lot of stuff, but not much about this.

Bay Area Guy said...

Think about this:

If the NY Times and the New Yorker are absolutely hammering a rich, New York, Democrat/Hollywood power mogul like Harvey Weinstein, then there is a major cosmic disturbance in the force.

I credit Trump.

rhhardin said...

Strongly disagree. There is power and it is wielded. Sometimes justly, sometimes unjustly.

If your livelihood depends on the good graces of Person X, and Person X requests you to do something stupid, unwise, unpleasant and dishonest, sometimes you do it.

That's power.


Do the google for the four terms and tell me which one you're talking about. It's a really focussing exercise.

Birches said...

I can understand why you feel that way eric. I am also a bit baffled that so many women knew and did nothing, allowing more women to become victims.

But as to your first point, women talk out their feelings, men don't have the same impulse.

Achilles said...

Rhardin has a point. The women are being made out to be weak powerless victims with no agency. They all made decisions and knew the score with Weinstein before getting involved with him.

The left is infested with twisted power relationships. Everyone knew what was going on and a certain type of woman was attracted to that situation. It seems the left and sexually abusive men attract the same type of people.

exiledonmainstreet said...

madAsHell said...
I wonder what he did to make her uncomfortable during the first visit? Get naked?

In some sense, this is about a guy that couldn't, or didn't know how to satisfy a woman.

10/10/17, 11:27 AM

But really powerful men don't have to satisfy women. They don't need to be smooth. They don't need to know, or bother with, the arts of seduction. Genghis Khan didn't have to be charming. I doubt he worried about his partner's pleasure.

In the modern and more limited world of Hollywood, Weinstein had the power to make and break lives.

rhhardin said...

Genghis Khan didn't have assault, rape and kidnapping laws to deal with.

Lewis Wetzel said...

Why don't the Dems run Weinstein for prez? Bill Clinton could be VP. They would fill the White House with women. The feminists would be overjoyed!

rhhardin said...

Weinstein sounds like a complete boor to me but maybe women like him.

Ralph L said...

If the stars had just invited him to those notorious Hollywood orgies, none of this would have happened. Ungrateful shits.

After the [forced fellatio] encounter, she met with the female casting executive... Weinstein, Evans said, began calling her again late at night.
She still wanted to work for the man who raped her? A Middlebury student, presumably somewhat woke and well off, not poor white trash?

rhhardin said...

We have to consider how Weinstein could win Althouse over.

A life story perhaps. "This is amazng, Ann."

Ron Winkleheimer said...

There is a race of intelligent carrots on another planet who have better insight into human behavior.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_KdE_zBCE4

gspencer said...

To sum up the whole story,

Weinstein is an excellent example of a Democrat.

exiledonmainstreet said...

"Wonder if Rolling Stone magazine passed on it for that reason"

RS had their hands full investigating frat boy gang rapes at UVA.

rhhardin said...

My own life story is a grunt who managed to keep a play-for-pay job for his entire life. No law school, no art training. No market.

Freeman Hunt said...

If you want to know why many women, especially the ones he did not touch and who did not do anything with him, didn't say anything at the time, think of it like this:

A guy flashes you in the park. You call the police, and they say, "The cost of reporting this crime is $1,000,000, though sometimes the total cost in the end runs to $20,000,000 plus."

These women were (rightly) fearful that he would harm their careers. It would have been easy for Weinstein to do incredible damage to someone's career. It could be as simple as,

"Well, Harvey, I'm thinking Jane Doe would be great for this part in my project. She's been doing fantastic work."
"That's an interesting idea. I don't know. I've heard she's been increasingly difficult. I don't think I can see her in that part. She's missing something for it. I don't know. I mean, if you *really* want to approach her about it, okay, but I wouldn't get locked into it. Some people are saying she's maybe a bit overrated."
"I think she's great!"
"I thought you had better judgement. Ha! I couldn't put you on one of my projects with judgement like that. Oh, I'm kidding. Of course, I'm kidding. It's not like she'd ruin your picture probably. Whatever you want to do, that's fine."

And on any projects he was involved in, he could simply say, "No, not her."

Yes, they should have come forward, but it's also more complicated than some people pretend.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

You don't engage in that kind of behavior unless you are absolutely sure you can get away with it. Weinstein is probably pretty confused about his current situation.

John Tuffnell said...

Lots of enablers. His employees, producers, directors, and actors who directly benefitted from him, the industry that protected him, his lawyers, the lawyers of his victims who always settled and never filed suit, the Democrats who took his money, the press who couldn't ever until now seem to find the right amount of proof.

It's almost like a swamp that needs to be drained. It's almost like the whole Hollywood "Speaking truth to power" thing is all bullshit. Oscars might actually be interesting this year to see how they pull off the moral preening.

Time to amend the tax code to eliminate Big Film tax breaks. Because a crisis is a terrible thing to waste.

Assrat said...

>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_KdE_zBCE4

And I was most vexed since the planet apparently had no name.

exiledonmainstreet said...

rhhardin said...
Genghis Khan didn't have assault, rape and kidnapping laws to deal with.

10/10/17, 11:56 AM

Obviously, Khan was far more powerful that Weinstein. But Weinstein clearly wasn't worried about being called out for sexual harassment.

Want to bet that that he supported Anita Hill's claims?

DKWalser said...

Rhardin has a point. The women are being made out to be weak powerless victims with no agency. They all made decisions and knew the score with Weinstein before getting involved with him.

The left is infested with twisted power relationships. Everyone knew what was going on and a certain type of woman was attracted to that situation. It seems the left and sexually abusive men attract the same type of people.


And that makes it okay? In our country we've made it illegal for someone to pressure another for sexual favors in exchange for job benefits (including merely keeping or getting a job). Does it happen anyway? Yes, it does. But that doesn't make it any less illegal.

Nor does saying that only a certain type of women would be attracted to work in an industry with such a reputation make this a victim less crime. What about all the other women who would have loved a shot at stardom but excluded themselves because they feared they'd need to sell their body to achieve their career goals? Just because the women who put out weren't mistreated doesn't make it okay to discriminate against those who wouldn't. You're allowing women who prostitute themselves to have an unfair advantage over those who won't.

rhhardin said...

If you want to know why many women, especially the ones he did not touch and who did not do anything with him, didn't say anything at the time, think of it like this:

You don't have to report anything. That's a women-uncomfortable thing. Who cares.

Crimes you can report. Kidnapping, assault, rape.

Gossip all you like.

Normal rules.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Freeman Hunt is right.

rhhardin said...

And that makes it okay? In our country we've made it illegal for someone to pressure another for sexual favors in exchange for job benefits (including merely keeping or getting a job). Does it happen anyway? Yes, it does. But that doesn't make it any less illegal.

Illegal isn't a moral argument; but even so the women are contractors, not employees. They make the deal or not.

The inadvisability of making what makes women uncomfortable into laws is what I'm arguing. There can be no consistent law of women's uncomfortability.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

why are RH's comments still here?

Gahrie said...

You can't make accusations on behalf of other people.

Tell that to the placekicker at USC and his girlfriend.

rhhardin said...

Obviously, Khan was far more powerful that Weinstein. But Weinstein clearly wasn't worried about being called out for sexual harassment.

Khan had potestas. Weinstein doesn't. No contest.

The women are contractors, not employees; they make their own deals.

Scott McGlasson said...

I always wondered what happened to Rosanna Arquette. Now I know.

rhhardin said...

why are RH's comments still here?

The battle of men and women is more interesting than anything Weinstein is doing.

Fernandinande said...

SOMEBODY IS WRONG ON THE INTERNET

Fernandinande said...
Yup, just after "Yesterday was too much for me [so I came back today]!"


D'oh, I didn't realize that that she was back as part of working with the police, so major apologies to Ambra Battilana Gutierrez, who was doing the right thing.

hombre said...

Back in the old football days what's going on here was called "piling on." Where were all these crusaders for twenty years while "rumors" of his conduct were plentiful? Excuses aside, were there no women with the courage to step forward? Where were all these self-righteous liberal Democrats when Bill Clinton's victims came forward repeatedly, several with more serious allegations than those against Harvey W.

Harvey Weinstein is no victim, but the celebs and media people who pointedly omit Clinton from their predator lists, including New Yorker and Farrow, and others who ignored Harvey's transgressions for years are bleating hypocrites.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Will feminists hold demonstrations outside of studios to protest Hollywood's Rape Culture?

Left Bank of the Charles said...

The Mira Sorvino tag brings up one other post, which cites this approvingly:

"A Woody Allen joke: 'Is sex dirty? Only if it's done right.'"

And then gets in this gratuitous dig:

"If you clicked on the Barbie link and heard the voice of Barbie, don't you think she sounded an awful lot like Mira Sorvino in her Oscar-winning role — as a prostitute, naturally — in the Woody Allen movie 'Mighty Aphrodite'? I say 'naturally,' because they are always handing out Oscars to actress who take on the amazing challenge of playing a whore."

SeanF said...

Bay Area Guy: Harvey's (highly) paid spokeswoman:

“Mr. Weinstein obviously can’t speak to anonymous allegations, but with respect to any women who have made allegations on the record, Mr. Weinstein believes that all of these relationships were consensual...."


He says that he didn't force himself on any of the women who have publicly accused him, but explicitly won't deny that he ever forced himself on anybody else. Interesting.

Ralph L said...

If they wouldn't go the press or police, you'd think another Hollywood producer would like to ruin Weinstein, especially if they could leave no fingerprints. Or would at least hire his rejects.
But that didn't work in the old studio system, did it, so rh's free market has never existed.

Original Mike said...

Was Weinstein the only movie maker in town?

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Will feminists hold demonstrations outside of studios to protest Hollywood's Rape Culture?



Prediction. NO.

buwaya said...

"Filipina-Italian model named Ambra Battilana Gutierrez"

Irrelevant point - she looks like the typical PAL stewardess.

Amexpat said...

I listened to the tape and don't think there's enough to convict HW in a court of law. But in the court of public opinion he's now toast. No redemption scenario for him now.

Freeman Hunt said...

"Was Weinstein the only movie maker in town?"

Probably the most connected one.

Johnny Sokko said...

Sounds like Bill Clinton

Bay Area Guy said...

@Exile,

Will feminists hold demonstrations outside of studios to protest Hollywood's Rape Culture?

Hell No! Because....Trump.

dustbunny said...

This story is really about the avalanche of show business personalities that were desperate to show their distance from all things Trump after nov 2017. A number of actors including Sean Penn and George Clooney made a point of attacking Steve Bannon as not really part of Hollywood. It now looks presient of Bannon, maybe his hatred of Hollywood and his desire to take down many of its virtue signaling inhabitants will be seen in a different light. It's difficult to see many coming out looking good after this but hundreds of PR agents are working on just that project.

exiledonmainstreet said...

"Where were all these self-righteous liberal Democrats when Bill Clinton's victims came forward repeatedly, several with more serious allegations than those against Harvey W."

Look at the women involved.

Billy Jeff's victims were mostly nobodies. Carville summed up the elite's attitude toward them with his comment about dragging a $20 bill through a trailer park. The same was true of Teddy Kennedy's victims. Nobody in the media cared about Mary Jo or some waitress getting manhandled by Kennedy and fellow drunken Democrat pig Chris Dowd.



Titus said...

Paltrow and Jolie just came forward about him trying to get in their pants

Original Mike said...

"Probably the most connected one."

So, in other words, No.

Sally327 said...

The reporter needed 13 women before the magazine would publish? I can understand needing more than one maybe even possibly more than two but 13? I wonder if he was angling for bigger names, like Sorvino and Arquette, and they didn't agree to go on the record until late. Oh and the 16 assistants and executives, I wonder why they aren't named.

The quid pro quo seems clear, give in or your career will suffer. But I wonder how that gets proven? And who would be implicated in that. Will any other producers or directors admit to not casting one of these women because Harvey Weinstein made a call and asked them not to.

I get that he was an important guy but this seems like maybe the myth overtook the reality, that he was this God-like figure who could rain fire and damnation down on anyone whenever he wanted to. In the land of make-believe, maybe it's not a surprise. But it's too bad no one called his bluff sooner.

buwaya said...

This smells like it was prepared, organized, and pending.
Some extra interviews added to five it some current flavor, but it seems to have been latent for at least two years.
The Gutierrez sting would have been public knowledge since 2015 had there been any interest by the press. Or, rather, it seems to me it was placed in a back pocket.

rhhardin said...

Paltrow and Jolie just came forward about him trying to get in their pants

The former shows he like streamed clams.

Rusty said...

Why are leftists such sleaze bags? It's almost like its a requirement or something.

rhhardin said...

Trying to get in actresses' pants is Hollywood's form of sincerity.

Everybody's sincere about something.

JSF said...

Something to think about:

If Hillary Clinton won, this story would never have broken.

Weinstein would have been protected by President Hillary Clinton's DOJ and FBI.

Maybe if the Democrats cleaned their own house first of the Bill Clintons, the Weiner's, the Ted Kennedy's and the Harvey Weinstein's they might win beyond the Northeast and past the 405.

Bob Ellison said...

Freeman Hunt, you're wrong.

The cost is not how much the actress stands not to win. It'd be nice if everyone as pretty as Jennifer Lawrence or Ben Affleck could say "I want my $20m!"

That's not the cost. The cost is to your conscience. What did you do to decide "I'm not going to tell people what this guy did"?

And I have to add that as a white guy who doesn't look like Johnny Depp, I'm not gettin' any $20m offers.

John Tuffnell said...

"But it's too bad no one called his bluff sooner."

Well, Barack said "Don't call my bluff," so there's that.

Meanwhile, a 22-year-old Italian woman went directly to the cops immediately after the incident. Looks like that helped start Hurricane Harvey

Virgil Hilts said...

Freeman Hunt is spot on.
But I think any actress who got this treatment would also be afraid of that Cowboy from Mulholland Drive showing up and saying "Now... you will see me one more time, if you do good. You will see me... two more times, if you do bad. Good night."

CStanley said...

The Gutierrez sting would have been public knowledge since 2015 had there been any interest by the press. Or, rather, it seems to me it was placed in a back pocket.

Some speculation about the timing here, basically chalking it up to internecine warfare among Democrats.

DKWalser said...

@rhhardin: I also oppose making what makes women (or men) uncomfortable illegal merely because it makes them uncomfortable. However, I quid pro quo sexual harassment falls into a different category from "makes women uncomfortable". If all Weinstein did was tell off color jokes or speak crudely in the company of women, I would consider this to be a whole lot of nothing. He did much more than that. It's those things that he should be punished for.

By trying to make this into another battle in the culture wars, you're weakening your case and alienating natural allies. This isn't only a case of Weinstien making crude advances. It is about him promising to make or break careers if she did or didn't do what he wanted. It's about his masturbating in a public restaurant as a way of intimidating and humiliating someone. It's about his choking and slamming against the wall someone who disagreed with him. With all these other things going on, trying to make this about his the few times he was merely crude or obnoxious won't work.

rhhardin said...

Rush is promising to air the tape.

He's on the Hollywood is awful side of the argument.

holdfast said...

Have you ever wondered what happened to a promising actress? Like, she was great in a couple of films, and then just fell off the radar, but with no obvious flops. I suspect we now know, at least in some cases.

rhhardin said...

However, I quid pro quo sexual harassment falls into a different category from "makes women uncomfortable"

Quid pro quo is just making a deal. Mutual advantage. Take it or leave it.

The rule is no fraud, no force, not that there must be a deal.

Think of it as an auction system. Only one actress is the top bidder. The others lose because that's how auctions work.

The next step is to say that that harms the company; I say in this case it doesn't. Actresses are interchangeable.

What I'm arguing is that women ought to be treated as adults.

Kevin said...

Presumably the NYT knew the New Yorker story was in the offing and got the jump on it,

...so they wouldn't be fully exposed for not running the earlier story and looking totally complicit in his acts.

Night Owl said...

"Presumably the NYT knew the New Yorker story was in the offing and got the jump on it,"

And now we cynics know why the NYT ran with the Weinstein story; it was to scoop the New Yorker. It was for ratings after all.

A Weekly Standard piece yesterday claimed that the Weinstein story would not have broken if Hillary had won, because it would've been too embarrassing to her presidency. Trump's win broke the power hold of the Clintons. Anti-Trumpers in Hollywood need to reflect on the possibility that Trump's presidency is doing more to help women in Hollywood than a Hillary presidency would've.

Kevin said...

Please address the new article in The New Yorker, the actual substance of it.

We are now at comment 169 and there is no sign of Now I Know!

Apparently substance isn't her thing.

CStanley said...

Paltrow and Jolie were both at one time involved romantically with Brad Pitt, Paltrow at the time of the incident. Makes it awfully hard now for Hollywood's leading men to keep claiming that they didn't know how bad Weinstein behavior was.

Sally327 said...

"Have you ever wondered what happened to a promising actress? Like, she was great in a couple of films, and then just fell off the radar, but with no obvious flops. I suspect we now know, at least in some cases.

10/10/17, 12:36 PM"

Possibly but it still seems like way too much power in one guy. I'm not saying it wasn't that way but I wonder if it was more the threat that it could happen that motivated people to shut up and go along than any evidence that all the bad things would actually happen. Although maybe his devotion to Democrat politics and politicians explains it, he had friends in all the right places I guess.

Kevin said...

For the record we should also note the NYT went out of its way to try to find women who would speak out about Trump - and failed - at the same time it had credible reporting on a major Democrat donor tied to both Hillary and Barack yet spiked the story.

Is the whole discussion about media bias over now, or do we still have people out there taking about how the mainstream media is so "right wing"?

AJ Lynch said...

I look forward to the movie. I wonder if all the female characters will wear pussy hats?

Omaha1 said...

Wow, this is really disturbing. I have been sexually harassed but never physically assaulted. And my harassment was just cooks at the greasy spoon where I waited tables, backing me into a corner in the pantry or the walk-in cooler. Usually they'd go away if I told them I already had a boyfriend. I can't imagine how frightened these poor women must have been, with such a powerful man putting pressure on them like this. It makes me feel shaky just listening to the recording.

Kevin said...

Paltrow and Jolie were both at one time involved romantically with Brad Pitt, Paltrow at the time of the incident. Makes it awfully hard now for Hollywood's leading men to keep claiming that they didn't know how bad Weinstein behavior was.

If someone with more time than me would just start making a network map of who dated and worked with who, it might reveal many people of interest to this story.

It would be like...journalism.

richlb said...

Maybe Harvey can borrow O'Reilly's falafel.

rhhardin said...

The mob likes it because Weinstein can stand for all men's behavior and an argument for all sorts of new laws and protections, a leftist heaven.

Conservatives ought to be noticing that such new laws produce exclusively bad side effects. Men no longer associate with women, for starters.

There was actually something worthwhile with men interacting with women, with all the flirtations, grudges, fears, needs, posturings that go with it. All the stuff that makes marriage different from gay marriage, in fact.

DKWalser said...

I listened to the tape and don't think there's enough to convict HW in a court of law.

Sure, the tape, by itself, wouldn't have been enough to convict. But, the tape would have corroborated the testimony of the victim. It would have buttressed any physical evidence they may have gathered. People have been prosecuted and convicted on far less.

hombre said...

Next, will we be hearing from A-list female soft core porn stars - assuming that the scenes were soft core - that it was a form of sexual harassment? "If you want the role, you will have to strip and dry hump your co-star."

You know, like Julianne Moore, Michelle Williams, Charlize Theron, Nicole Kidman, etc., who have been "harassed" this way over and over.

Today the Hollywood sex cult apparently draws the line at off screen, ugly male. Tomorrow? Who knows?

Bob Ellison said...

Night Owl referred to that Weekly Standard essay on Weinstein. The Weakly Standard, as usual. Where were they twenty years ago? They're calling names on their fella journalists now?

Bay Area Guy said...

Maybe I'm just obtuse, but here's what I simply don't get:

I lived in LA in my late teenage years/early 20s.

I was neither rich, famous nor powerful. Far from it. Just a guy with a car, with friends.

The girls were very pretty, very smart, very athletic, and very accomplished. Some wanted to become actresses or models, but most just wanted to get their college degrees.

There was no need to coax, or cajole, or use a date rape drug, or get anyone plastered at a frat house.

You took them to Santa Monica beach on a sunny Saturday.

You played volleyball with them at the Sunset Rec.

You went to movies in Westwood, and walked around the village arm and arm, hoping to show off your date for the evening.

If someone's parents were out of town, you went to a nice house in Laguna Hills or Palos Verdes, with 6 or 7 friends, raided the liquor cabinet, grilled some burgers, and coupled off in one of the bedrooms, as the night progressed.

If there was a 3-day weekend, you went on a road trip to Santa Barbara, or Palm Springs or San Luis Obispo, or, if you were real drunk and stupid, you went to Tijuana (usually the girls would not go to that place).

And guess what? There was sex galore! Sometimes you were on a roll, sometimes a losing streak, and sometimes you tried to make a relationship last, but you failed, and moved on.

It just seems crazy to me that these famous, powerful, mostly rich ADULTS (Congressmen, President, studio execs), can't even duplicate the harmless fun and mirth we enjoyed as teenagers 35 years ago -- in Los Angeles of all places.

The audio-tape of Harvey cajoling that poor woman is atrocious. A fat 65-year old Studio exec talks and acts like that? Wow, just wow.

Kevin said...

Conservatives ought to be noticing that such new laws produce exclusively bad side effects. Men no longer associate with women, for starters.

Already happening as that train left the station a long time ago. We're either going to make everyone play by the same rules with the same punishments, which might get some of this stuff reversed over time, or we're going to let one side get away with everything while the other side pays - which only leads to harsher penalties over time because it's become a political tool.

Kevin said...

Anybody heard from Hillary yet? It took her about six seconds to Tweet about gun control.

donald said...

You know what else? You just know that his wife, just like Hillary knew.

Kevin said...

The audio-tape of Harvey cajoling that poor woman is atrocious. A fat 65-year old Studio exec talks and acts like that? Wow, just wow.

The best part was when he swore on the lives of his children to advance his sexual assault.

How do you think that's going to go down with the wife and kids?

rehajm said...

Is the whole discussion about media bias over now,

Not as such...

SDaly said...

In response to Freeman - I am in complete agreement, up to a point.

When it became "common knowledge" within the industry, though, there was sufficient information for the actresses to find each other and go to Weinstein's board/the newspapers/whoever to report it and demand action be taken. In this sense, his political connections would probably have helped the victims, because a big, lurid story with sufficient factual support would have made them cut ties with him instantly. Also, all of them are SAG (union) members. They could have made a stink through the union.

Ralph L said...

What I'm arguing is that women ought to be treated as adults.

From the article, it appears some don't act like them. Dr. Drew says most adults who put up with abuse were abused or witnessed abuse as children.
This might have something to do with why some are so desperate to be in show business.

JTE said...

Meryl Streep's daughters are actresses. Wouldn't someone(an agent, a lawyer, a friendly casting director) have suggested to Meryl that she caution her daughters about solo meetings with Weinstein? Wouldn't those daughters have heard rumors from their friends in Hollywood? It's just hard for me to believe that this is all news to her.

Kevin said...

What I'm arguing is that women ought to be treated as adults.

It appears at least one of them went to the police, went back wearing a wire, and had the case spiked when he donated $10,000 to the prosecutor.

What more did you want her to do?

buwaya said...

Then there is the question of Cyrus Vance Jr.

He is in an extremely powerful position as NYC-Manhattan DA.
A very large slice of the US GDP is under his prosecutorial discretion.

Perhaps Weinstein is just collateral damage.

Hari said...

Harvey Weinstein was in the business of both taking risks and begging for the outcome he wanted.

Putting up millions to make a movie that could bomb was not much different from putting up much less to pay off harassment charges when his behavior bombed.

Begging and pleading for sex was not much different from begging for academy awards.

rhhardin said...

Had what case spiked? There was no case, unless really bad seduction attempts are a crime.

Kevin said...

Meryl Streep's daughters are actresses. Wouldn't someone(an agent, a lawyer, a friendly casting director) have suggested to Meryl that she caution her daughters about solo meetings with Weinstein? Wouldn't those daughters have heard rumors from their friends in Hollywood? It's just hard for me to believe that this is all news to her.

You can replace Meryl Streep with Barack and Michelle Obama, and actresses with film industry interns, and ask the same relevant questions.

Ralph L said...

Bay Area Guy, time is money, and these guys are cheap.

James K said...

Wonder if Rolling Stone magazine passed on it for that reason

Haven't we already learned from the Erdely affair that Rolling Stone has no journalistic standards? So what was their excuse again?

rhhardin said...

Rush is doing the tape now.

Bob Ellison said...

You don't act like you're in a union if you're on top of the union.

Chuck said...

A question for Althouse: are you ever going to credit the sources and journalists -- specifically NYT and The New Yorker? This is the sort of expose' that Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity would never attempt, much less run, if it involved Trump. They would be actively undermining the sources and their stories.

Full stop.

Ken B said...

"Rhardin has a point. The women are being made out to be weak powerless victims with no agency. They all made decisions and knew the score with Weinstein before getting involved with him."

Yes. Arquette said her career suffered. Probably true, as she was shunted aside by producers other than Weinstein in favor of actresses who submitted to Weinstein. Aren't they also guilty of something here? Say I'm a studly hunk and a law prof pushing 60 hits on me and suggests my marks might suffer if I reject her. So I agree to service her -- cue Laslo -- in return for an A+. Is the prof worse? Yes. Am I an innocent victim? Not entirely.

James K said...

There was no case, unless really bad seduction attempts are a crime.

Is DKWalser not correct that demanding sex for job opportunities is illegal? I honestly don't know. I would have thought it would be a civil offense.

Kevin said...

Had what case spiked? There was no case, unless really bad seduction attempts are a crime.

Is this the bad seduction attempt where he admits he did something wrong to her last night and promises he won't do anything wrong again if she follows him to his room?

buwaya said...

"Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity would never attempt, much less run"

Limbaugh and Hannity (and shamefully, Fox) lack the resources and ability to do actual investigative journalism. This is the expensive part of the news and the part that keeps the MSM around. The alternate media has some independent people who can get some things, but not on this scale. It also helps for the investigator to be "friendly", in-tribe.

As for investigating Trump, everyone he knew socially would have been in that same Weinstein-showbiz-celebrity-NYC circle. The NYT would be in an enormously better position to investigate Trump scandals than the alternative media.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 313   Newer› Newest»