ADDED: After writing this post, I watched about half of last night's "SNL" (which I had on the DVR). Not only was there nothing about Harvey Weinstein, but it was full of sexism. Nearly everything involving women was about women's bodies. Despite all the female performers on the show (including the guest host "Wonder Woman" Gal Gadot). roles for women were all Women as Sex Object, including Gal Gadot — wearing a black bra under a tight white tank top — doing a sexy dancing move involving holding lemons in front of her breasts and Kate McKinnon as a highly sexualized Ruth Bader Ginsburg repeatedly dancing in glee at insults about things like penis size. Women are only funny as sex objects — that seems to be the "SNL" theory. Here, check it out:
By the way, the "horny granny" character was a longtime meme in Playboy as a cartoon character drawn by Buck Brown:
McKinnon's Ginsburg character describes the shape of her breasts at one point and I would not be surprised if the image of what an older woman's breasts look like was taken right from the Playboy cartoon character and not from any real experience of or empathy toward older women.
Like Weinstein's Hollywood, "SNL" would like us to think it has feminist values, but it does not. It's a show for the boys.
Posts
83 comments:
I suppose there is a very large number of well-known actresses who had it off with Harvey and feel, in whatever decent recesses of their souls that may exist, some sense of shame about it. But they did it! And paying their dues paid off for them. And now, like Jane Fonda with Megyn Kelly, they will be all "do we really want to talk about that now?"
"Not one Harvey Weinstein joke on a Democrat-controlled program"
Serving the Master, thoroughly and well. Never speak ill of a Democrat predator.
My bet is they will do a skit where he is commiserating with Alec Baldwin's Trump.
You can figure where it will go from there.
I am Laslo.
Terms of all their non disclosure agreements prevented it.
What is wrong with people?
**Comments Accepted**
If it doesn't advance the agenda, it doesn't go in the show. As noted at InstaPundit, a person in Hollywood is much more likely to be demonized if he is a Republican than if he's a sexual predator.
If they didn't jump on the gun control rants it would be a crisis gone to waste.
Hillarywood DNC TV - the stepford wives of the DNC.
The collective leftwing hive mind refuses to believe any crimes within the collective.
Hillary never set up a Private Server.
Bill never raped anyone
Teddy never drove MaryJo over a bridge and left her to die.
Harvey is being railroaded by the vast RWC.
Menendez corrupt money whoring = never happened. perfectly innocent.
and on and on
An Encounter on a Manhattan Street...
"Ashley! It's good to see you!"
"I'm not talking to you, Harvey."
"Oh, yeah... that. That was a long time ago, Ashley: I'm a different man now. I'm getting help."
"You'll never be a better man, Harvey. You will always be a man who preys on women."
"In my defense, some of those women got Oscars."
"That doesn't cut it, Harvey."
"Is that what this is about? That I didn't get you an Oscar?"
"You don't get it, Harvey. I had to watch you shower."
"I can explain that. When I was a young boy my mother would watch me in the shower. Every time I took a shower there she was, watching. My therapists say that messed me up."
"I'm sorry to hear that, Harvey, but I don't care. What you did to me was unacceptable."
"Trust me, I know that NOW."
"It doesn't matter, Harvey. It's too late."
"Surely there is something I can do..."
"No, Harvey: no there isn't."
"I know! How about I donate fifty thousand to Planned Parenthood in your name. I know you like Planned Parenthood, because of your abortion thing..."
"You can't buy me, Harvey."
"Okay, okay: a hundred thousand."
"A hundred thousand? How about a hundred-and-fifty?"
"A hundred-and-fifty thousand? For that much I'll need to touch your tits..."
I am Laslo.
Unlike you, most people are still thinking about the tragedy on Monday.
Apparently you and the NRA would rather move on from that headline.
On Google "ejaculated into a plant" returns only 4 results? Sounds like more politicized search manipulation. At least I can make it 5.
They're all on the same team. You don't score points against your own team, that'd be stupid.
My guess, Harvey isn't the only person that engages in such behavior in the entertainment industry. You start opening that can of worms and suddenly mixed metaphors will be dropping all over the place.
Whoops -- "ejaculated into a potted plant" gets 38,000 results, so my apologies Google.
@Mark
Did you see the article about how this Harvey fellow physically assaulted someone? Knocked him down a flight of stairs so hard the guys camera actually caused some sort of permanent harm to some innocent bystander? And then he continued the assault? And got away with it?
You know, if I attacked someone and pushed them down a flight of stairs (which could easily of led to them breaking their neck and dying) I would be in jail and the absolute best I could hope for would be anger management counseling, weekends in jail for years, and paying out most of the money I was making (assuming I still had a job) to the victims. That's the best I could hope for. More likely, a few years in the state slammer.
Mark said...
Unlike you, most people are still thinking about the tragedy on Monday.
Apparently you and the NRA would rather move on from that headline.
Oh, I'll bet most of us are still thinking about it, Mark, but there hasn't been any new information from the authorities to talk about. Have you noticed that, Mark?
And this assault happened in front of multiple witnesses, at a party? And there were no repercussions from his social and business milieu?
So, I never cared for lectures on morality and politics from people whose qualification for giving those lectures is that they managed to get on TV and the movies. And I can't say I am surprised about the kind of compromises you have to make to get on TV and the movies. But hey, now its confirmed.
I also found it interesting in the article about Harvey assaulting that guy there was a list of sexual predators. Know who was left off that list? I bet you do. Bill Clinton.
Devil's advocate might say...
Maybe a lot of these women feel like it's nobody's business if they slept with Harvey Weinstein to get a part that made all their dreams come true.
Every guy they have ever met since high school has wanted to have sex with them. Weinstein had a helluva lot more to offer than anybody else ever could.
As far as they're concerned, Weinstein kept his end of the bargain and they have zero regrets. If they hadn't met Weinstein and seized the opportunity, they would be waiting tables somewhere, divorced from a failed actor, divorced from a plumber with a drinking problem, have a kid from the former, two kids from the later, drive a '97 Nissan POS and stare at the knockdown on the ceiling of shitty apartment every night, thinking about what might have been.
To talk about what Weinstein did is to talk about what they did too. And that's nobody's business.
Devil's advocate might say.
It's like Stalin's deathbed scene. What if Weinstein recovers?
Did SNL's Weekend Update token black guy call Trump a cracker again like he did last week?
Solid prediction:
Kimmel with turn Weinstein into a victim.
WE all know poor Anthony Weiner was also rail-roaded by the Vast Rightwing Conspiracy.
His poor penis was hacked by Trump and the Russians.
Mark blathered: "Unlike you, most people are still thinking about the tragedy on Monday."
Unlike you Mark, I think about others things as well. I am continually amazed at the smallness of the liberal mind.
SNL can't really comment or make fun because their casting couch is well used. You don't think the women on that stage won't feel a bit uncomfortable after having to go through the interview when they do a skit making a joke?
They have talent! Awkward...
I am willing to bet there isn't a clean operation in that town.
@ Mark
Unlike you, most people are still thinking about the tragedy on Monday.
That could be your perception if you are riding on the short bus.
Blogger Mark said...
"Unlike you, most people are still thinking about the tragedy on Monday.
Apparently you and the NRA would rather move on from that headline."
Don't worry Mark. We will return to that after his "I did it for Allah" video is finally released. They are busy arresting other cells now.
We talked about Benghazi for months and months despite the lower death toll and lack of new information.
But Ann buries Vegas under a flood of Weinstein topics. Not even our pussy grabber in chief got such attention about his harrassing ways.
Only eight reported cases over thirty years. The guy knows how to do damage control. The floodgates seem to be holding. No stars are coming forward with further revelations or denunciations. Those stars are in a bit of a pickle. If they come forward now, they look complicit in his past sins. If they maintain a discreet silence, it makes their favorite pose of speaking truth to power look suspect.......The guess here is that, for the most part, they will all keep quiet in the hope that it all blows over. Maybe they'll get away with it. Weinstein did for thirty years.
"Maybe they'll get away with it. Weinstein did for thirty years."
As I said yesterday, no one wants to admit to giving Harvey a rim-job.
Pity the actresses cursed with long tongues.
I am Laslo.
Actually mark, Benghazi was by a symptom of a policynthat expanded Al qedas reach into the Niger river delta, of course the Clinton foundation enabled that through the stripping of the states resources.
@William
More importantly they will have to admit they got the part because they were on the couch rather that any acting skills or talent.
Not even one "Weekend Update" joke about Harvey Weinstein on last night's "SNL."
And this is surprising...how?
But Ann buries Vegas under a flood of Weinstein topics. Not even our pussy grabber in chief got such attention about his harrassing ways.
Imagine the important stuff that could be discussed if you had your own blog.
You cannot expect Jews to turn on a fellow sectarian.
Harvey Weinstein the Musical. A man. A plan. An alimentary canal.
So ambassador Stevens last words, are only heard in regards to a court proceeding five years later.
The California water shortage was caused by Harvey Weinstein casting female leads for his last couple of dozen movies. Fact.
I get the sense that Weinstein is not the biggest sleaze in Hollywood, although he's, undoubtedly, in the top ten per cent. Casting is everything, He looks like a sleaze. Someone like Errol Flynn looks more like a cad than a sleaze........Sports and entertainment are industries founded on envy, sexism, and inequality. Their stars hould steer clear of social justice subjects because their industries are notoriously deficient in such virtues.
Ashley Judd, Renée Zellweger and Cate Blanchett have a chat...
Ashley: "So Cate, what did Harvey do to YOU...?"
Cate: "It was horrible -- I had to watch him take a shower. That man seriously needs to lose some weight."
Ashley: "What about you, Renée?
Renée: "Oh, I don't even like to think about it."
Ashley: "You can tell us, Renée: it will make us stronger."
Renée: "Well... he made me watch him masturbate."
Ashley: "And what else?"
Renée: "What else? He made me watch him masturbate, that's it."
Ashley: "What about you, Cate? What did Harvey do to you after you watched him shower?"
Cate: "There was nothing else. He got dressed and we talked about a film."
Ashley: "Wait! Am I the only one who had to eat Harvey's asshole?"
Cate: "Eat his asshole? God no, I wouldn't do such a thing."
Renée: "Yeah, that's gross, eating Harvey's asshole. I would've left the room..."
Cate: "Ashley, YOU ate Harvey's asshole?"
Ashley: "Uh... yeah. I did: I thought all the girls had to eat Harvey's asshole."
Renée: "Ewwww. I couldn't live with myself if I had to eat Harvey's asshole."
Cate: "I have self-respect."
Ashley: "Surely SOMEONE else must have had to eat Harvey's asshole."
Cate: Not that I know of. I don't think Gwyneth would've done it."
Renée: Gwyneth IS weird, but I can't picture her eating Harvey's asshole."
Ashley: "This is AWFUL. I thought surely someone else ate Harvey's asshole..."
Cate: "I don't know, maybe you could check with Rose McGowan..."
Renée: Oh yes: I would DEFINITELY check with Rose McGowan. Did you know she dated Marilyn Manson? Eww...."
I am Laslo.
The use of the word “anger” is an exaggeration there.
The twitter response I saw, and I was up late, I would characterize as mostly amusement, you know like something you expect but still worth mentioning because why would you pay a buffet and avoid the best tasting treat? Unless you’re allergic, in which case choosing to still go to such a buffet must be because you like something particular that they make that apparently has not caught on to the rest of the public that this this thing is what everyone ought to feast on.
Not Harvey Weinstein.
(Pro tip: if you follow Harvey Weinstein your phone will give you his correct name spelling)
But Ann buries Vegas under a flood of Weinstein topics. Not even our pussy grabber in chief got such attention about his harrassing ways.
I think "Mark" knows Weinstein and wants to change the subject from such an uncomfortable topic.
The Hollywood elite will attend Weinstein's funeral "Just to make sure the sonofabitch is dead," then we night hear something.
" Apparently you and the NRA would rather move on from that headline." Heh, now do Chicago. You know, Chicago, where your gun control bullshit kills 5 dozen on a monthly basis. Yes, your gun control and your scumbag party whom collude with the gang bangers to suppress and disarm the people.
Oh, and do your favorite eugenics organization, you know, that organization that routinely chops up babies to sell their parts for Lamborghini payments. You can do Detroit, St Louis, and other dungeons of democrat and gun control extremism. Bugger off you asshat. Your a bunch of lying, cowardly, fascist shits.
It's simple really, they don't really believe in or care about anything other than power and control over others. Defending against sexual harassment is only important when it can be deployed against ones political enemies. Likewise gun control, and social justice, and the plight of the poor and downtrodden, and, of course, racism.
-sw
Or we could go to sinaloa and guadalajara, where the aft served as the quartermasters for a gangway:
pagesix.com/2017/10/08/new-york-magazine-fumbled-its-own-harvey-weinstein-expose
Right they didn't have reservations in other instanced.
most people are still thinking about the tragedy on Monday
Are you saying that SNL had some pretty funny jokes about the mass murder in Las Vegas, or that SNL should have gone dark this week so we could spend the 90 minutes thinking about the atrocity, or are you saying it's fine for the vile progs at SNL to joke about whatever they want for their airtime, and now that the show's over we should all go back to talking about what you want to talk about?
Nobody knows who Weinstein is. It is hard to include jokes on a popular broad comedy show about someone who is not famous. So right wingers like Ann can fume on about this guy, it only demonstrates how obsessive (about a dozen posts now Ann?) and out of touch they are.
So was Boise the one who told new York to buzz off, (note the timing, it would have been rather awkward with access Hollywood kerfluffle)
Right, they not to tArget someone who would blackball you into eternity.
Considering Hollywood is pedophile paradise and all it's 'casting couches', why is anyone shocked?
Virgil Hilts said...
Whoops -- "ejaculated into a potted plant" gets 38,000 results, so my apologies Google.
Actually only 32 results, so you were closer the first time.
Now I Know! said...
"Nobody knows who Weinstein is."
Now everyone knows.
Mark said...
"We talked about Benghazi for months and months despite the lower death toll and lack of new information.
But Ann buries Vegas under a flood of Weinstein topics. Not even our pussy grabber in chief got such attention about his harrassing ways."
OK, Mark. What about Las Vegas do you want to talk about? Other than, "guns are bad, mkay."
Not even one "Weekend Update" joke about Harvey Weinstein on last night's "SNL."
That makes sense because apparently the uproar is just a feminist overreaction to some trivia:
NYT: "In interviews, eight women described varying behavior by Mr. Weinstein: appearing nearly or fully naked in front of them, requiring them to be present while he bathed or repeatedly asking for a massage or initiating one himself."
Big. Fucking. Deal.
Here are the actual predators:
"But most of the women involved in the Weinstein agreements collected between roughly $80,000 and $150,000, according to people familiar with the negotiations."
We should really be discussing Hillary's book tour.
As someone who believes the media marches in lockstep with whatever the democratic party wishes, cases like these are always confusing. I mean they have been complicit in covering Harvey's tracks for decades. Why now? What made him suddenly expendable?
"Most people are still thinking about the tragedy on Monday." Which is why they slipped in a one-liner about National Sarcasm Awareness Week and had a Ruth Bader Ginsberg schtick where she made jokes about conservatives on the court.
And Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman kissing Kate McKinnon to see if she’s gay... don’t forget about the lesbian stuff. That there is comedy GOLD.
I hadn’t watched it in years, and it was just as I imagined... unfunny and hardly watchable. And reliably liberal.
Comedy really doesn’t need to be reliably on one side of a political spectrum. Missing half the joke material. Sad.
If you accept a position, promotion, or advancement for sexual favors, aren't you just another whore?
The idea that people don't know Weinstein is ridiculous. The movie business is one of the businesses that Americans are most interested in. We consume the product in mass quantities.
Whether you recognize the name of one of the most prominent executives or not, his misdeeds are important news, especially since he was making decisions on what went into a product that we ingested into our brain and our culture.
Even if you yourself don't watch movies, you should care about what's going into the head of your fellow citizen.
Those who are trying to tell me I'm giving to much importance to this story could try addressing these reasons, not just emptily complaining that I'm giving this too much attention. I suspect that you are agitated by how damaging this story might be to something you care about.
By the way, I saw the movie Ashley Judd made at the time she had her encounter with HW. It was called "Kiss the Girls," and it came out in the 90s, when I consumed a lot of movies. I saw it because it was touted as "neo-noir" and supposed to be excellent. But afterward, somebody just reminded me, I said it was the worse movie I'd ever seen. I'd forgotten that, but the person I saw the movie with remembered and said: "you thought it was sexualizing female victims and trying to titillate the audience when the women are crime victims, while acting like it’s taking a perspective that is against crime."
Althouse:
We used to care about movies. That has changed. Liberals eat their own.
I have moved from 'shut up and sing' to 'run your idiot mouths' because it reduces Leftist Collectivist influence. Free advice to help Leftist Collectivists costs me plenty.
" I said it was the worse movie I'd ever seen"
Should read: "the worst movie..."
"We used to care about movies. That has changed. Liberals eat their own."
What do you mean "we"?
And I'm enjoying the meal.
SNL knows its audience, which is limited to urban SJWs. Last week, they had a cast member referring to President Trump in racist terms (like calling him a cheap cracker) and no one batted an eyelash. A long time ago, they made a decision to be the weekly show confirming the biases of urban SJWs and the rest can pound sand. THeir choice.
I stopped watching years ago (occasionally watching skits online) because I got tired of getting the finger.
A really funny skit would be of former audience members being filmed having as much respect for SNL as SNL does for them. COMedy gold in there.
Hey Mark, If I were the New York Times and I wanted to publish, but also try to bury, a story about Hollywood's most famous Democrat sexual predator, would I choose to publish the expose the very week of the Las Vegas massacre so that people like Mark could use the Vegas story to deflect the Weinstein story for me?
Just askin'.
"Nobody knows who Weinstein is. It is hard to include jokes on a popular broad comedy show about someone who is not famous. So right wingers like Ann can fume on about this guy, it only demonstrates how obsessive (about a dozen posts now Ann?) and out of touch they are."
Well, Meet the Press thought it was newsworthy this morning.
Isn't Weinstein one of the most powerful people in Hollywood...which would make him one of the most important people in the world?
Maybe it just refutes the narrative in your mind?
I can give SNL a partial break for not building a skit around the revelations. Those skits take time and the news broke on Thursday. To ignore it on Weekend Update? The fix is clearly in.
Makes the show's sanctimony even harder to swallow.
That's true about Meet the Press, Larry Nelson; Chuck Todd devoted most of Endgame to it. Now I'm going to go back downstairs and see what This Week with or w/o George Stephanopoulos (I think this week is w/o) does with it, if anything.
Skipped Face the Nation, as usual. For one thing, there's overlap.
People who have a interest in current events, entertainment and politics know exactly who Harvey Weinstein is.
radioone said...
If you accept a position, promotion, or advancement for sexual favors, aren't you just another whore?
Well, yeah, and the crap they're complaining about is trivial.
Check this:
"I witnessed Harvey Weinstein’s sleaziness up close: ex-waitress"
Basically he met prostitutes at some restaurant, they'd leave together and come back after a while.
But this was the funny part:
"As he attempted to charm his guests, he terrorized the wait staff."
Exactly how did he terrorize the waitrons?
"He would almost never look you in the eye, too busy reading the paper or biting off an assistant’s head."
...
"He made his frustration known by attempting to tap her butt to get her attention."
He terrorized the waitrons by not looking them in the eye and by not tapping them on the butt.
"Once, while I put in an order at the computer, he barreled up and body-checked me."
What does that mean? She doesn't say he pushed or touched her, so apparently he just stood in her way.
How unsurprising that a person not part of the we does not understand the we.
"Not even our pussy grabber in chief got such attention about his harrassing ways."
It turns out, a guy talking about how women will let you grope them is not really as interesting as the guy who actually exploits that fact to reward the women who do (one may assume this also means 'and end the careers of those who don't').
What's strange to me is that there's so much fuss over something most of us knew has been going on since real money and fame entered the entertainment business. That and how little he asked for (or got) that's been made public.
I still haven't heard of anyone besides his wives trading sex with him for other favors.
Or sex with him without any favors, which would be a real man bites dog.
I read the article Ferdinande links to above. Weinstein treats subordinates badly and makes use of high end call girls. None of this was surprising, and none of it enhances Weinstein's reputation, but neither is it the crushing, final blow to that reputation. My guess is that Weinstein has behaved badly with other actresses besides Judd and McGowan. They've got rather more reason to stay quiet than to come forward, so Weinstein can rest comfortably for the nonce. But there's this sense that another shoe is about to drop that will keep any from coming to his defense. Perhaps his fate is never to be exonerated and never to be quite damned. We'll have to wait and see how the drama plays out, but there is no way. Hollywood or Weiner come out of it looking good. They've got a Weiner tattoo on their collective ass.
The real puzzler is mentioned above: Why would the NYT choose this guy to out at this time? Makes no sense to me and it certainly makes no sense given the NYT past performance. Makes me suspicious that there is even worse out there and this is cover for it, or intended to prepare us for the "nothing here, move along" phase before the really bad news breaks. Then there is always Menendez who looks like he is well done at this point. Maybe this intended to help him. You know, something like: "Hey, this was only Medicare fraud and bribery, no sexual harassment even. What's the fuss?"
When I come across "entertainment"programming (briefly at most) I typically ask my wife, "Who is that?" In other words I really am not on the front lines of awareness of the Hollywood glitterati.
But Harvey W? Hell yes I know who he is.
The entertainment people are steering clear because they know he may recover, and he keeps score.
"What's strange to me is that there's so much fuss over something most of us knew has been going on since real money and fame entered the entertainment business. "
Indeed. Which is why the cynics are curious about the timing of this story, and wondering about what is really going on. My own inner cynic is asking, "How are we being played?"
"Not even one joke about Harvey Weinstein on SNL."
Democracy dies in darkness.
"Nobody knows who Weinstein is. It is hard to include jokes on a popular broad comedy show about someone who is not famous. So right wingers like Ann can fume on about this guy, it only demonstrates how obsessive (about a dozen posts now Ann?) and out of touch they are."
Nobody knows who this guy is. And if they do? They're out of touch.
Classic.
Just classic.
Harvey who?
Oh, him?! He was just some guy from the block. Why are you so obsessed over this?
Kinda suspicious, really.
You know anti-Semites are often obsessed over fanciful stories of evil Jewish people acting in secret...
What kind of a person are you, anyway?
Jim,
"Right wingers like Ann"? If you think this, and you think no one knows who Harvey Weinstein is, you need to get out more - and perhaps meet one or two right wingers in the process.
I meant "Now I know!," not Jim.
Post a Comment