October 14, 2017

Harvey Weinstein's brother says he was a victim of Harvey's abuse too, but he knows he can't expect any sympathy.

The Hollywood Reporter reports:
I was also the object of a lot of his verbal abuse — at one time physical abuse. And I am not looking for one bit of sympathy from anyone. I do not put myself in the category at all of those women that he hurt. But it's a complicated situation when it's your brother doing the abusing to you as well. I saw it and I asked him to get help for many years. And that's the truth. He avoided getting the help. We begged him.

This hurts, but I don't feel an ounce of remorse coming from him, and that kills me too. When I heard his written, lame excuse… Not an excuse. When I heard his admission of feeling remorse for the victims and then him cavalierly, almost crazily saying he was going to go out and take on the NRA, it was so disturbing to me. It was utter insanity. My daughters all felt sick hearing this because we understood he felt nothing. I don't feel he feels anything to this day. I don't.

100 comments:

robother said...

Well, anger. Harvey feels anger. But Bob's there to pick up the pieces, as he's been doing forever.

rhhardin said...

Worse than not feeling, he has no sense of humor.

Mattman26 said...

Sounds like this one got the emotional balance and perceptive skills that the other one missed.

donald said...

I don't feel an ounce of remorse for Bob Weinstein, Harvey's cuck.

They just need to go ahead and shut that thing down now. They're just throwing money away now.

rhhardin said...

Harvey will be happiest participating in internet comment threads.

rhhardin said...

Wait for Harvey's Amazon portal.

Fernandinande said...

I was also the object of a lot of his verbal abuse — at one time physical abuse.

My childhood was so deprived that I had to be abused by my imaginary friend.

David Begley said...

Hillary knew more than Bob.

YoungHegelian said...

Harvey also just destroyed Bob's (& Harvey's) life's work, i.e. the Weinstein Corp. I guess they got to cash out on Miramax to Disney, but the present company now is toast. Harvey's shenanigans probably has cost Bob several million dollars.

When the payouts to victims, politicians, Hollywood fixers, etc are all factored in, those were really, really, expensive rolls in the hay for Harvey Weinstein. It would have been a lot cheaper just to stick with high end call girls. They'd be happy to watch him shower of fertilize plants for the right price.

tim in vermont said...

http://www.hollywood.com/general/film-producer-alison-owen-harvey-weinstein-salivated-over-meg-ryans-breasts-60699415/

Rob said...

This is all gonna make a helluva movie. Just imagine the open casting call for the part of Rose McGowan.

tim in vermont said...

Was it Samuel Goldwyn who said about Hollywood, "Nobody knows nuthin'"? Cause boy howdy is that true.

rhhardin said...

Meg Ryan's breasts are unremarkable. That' the hazard of taking your shirt off in the movies. In the Cut (2003)

Better as an ingenue.

JAORE said...

But I'm going to attack the NRA, what's a few actresses sprinkled out over 3 decades? Right guys?

It's almost a surprise it didn't work.

Oh yeah, screw you, Bob. Nobody knew more than you. After the sale of Miramax you were wealthy beyond my wildest dreams. Yet you persisted.

AJ Lynch said...

Bob only feels now because his company and job are going to evaporate.

tcrosse said...

I was also the object of a lot of his verbal abuse — at one time physical abuse.

Evidently Harvey abused himself from time to time.

rhhardin said...

I think the only breast that was screen ready was Emily Blunt in something or other, but even that didn't seem to be a working breast. More of a screen breast.

Cusiously, namewise, it's for box office.

Bay Area Guy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
William said...

We've heard from Harvey's friends, wife, and, now, brother and nieces about what a loathsome piece of shit he really is. We have not yet heard from his children and grandchildren, but, other than them, everyone on earth who has ever known him has participated in the ritual denunciation. There's some competition in issuing the most vehement denunciation, but not a single one of those denunciations has been leavened with a word of praise or mitigation......Not so long ago, i.e last week, many of these same people were competing in their praises of this man. Keep on digging, Hollywood. Never ask for whom the grave is dug. It is dug for thee.

rhhardin said...

Harvey didn't do it, actually. It's a mob action brought on by somebody for a purpose unknown probably for some other purpose unknown. It went viral in a direction that's probably unpredicted and weird.

The certainty is that the mob is entertaining itself, which is how viral works.

JAORE said...

"Meg Ryan's breasts are unremarkable. "

Perhaps it was the image of innocent, girl next door, (plus young and perky) Meg that created the allure.

rhhardin said...

It's a high-tech lynching.

Bay Area Guy said...

Bob Weinstein, not bad. Slowly moving towards truth and justice. Knows that his equity share in Weinstein Co. is losing millions as he speaks.

Special shout out to Bob for smacking down Harvey's bogus reference to the "NRA" -- What the fuck does the NRA have to do with your repeated rapes and sexual assaults of women, Harvey? oh you, think your leftwing idiot friends in Hollywood are that stupid to be misdirected? Look the NRA! Squirrel!

Utter insanity, no remorse, says Brother Bob. Sounds pretty accurate to me.

Curious about the reference to "physical abuse," Bob. Does that mean he smacked you, as big brothers often do, or perhaps something much more indelicate?

The great unraveling continues!

rhhardin said...

Perhaps it was the image of innocent, girl next door, (plus young and perky) Meg that created the allure.

Right, it's really the character remembered that attracts the interest. Maybe I can get her interested in me.

But not only is she nothing but your wife or girlfriend with no clothes on when naked, she's a complete airhead too.

William said...

It's ok to abuse underlings. That's called being hard driving. Just don't masturbate in front of women. That's called being hard driven.

William said...

Is Harvey Weinstein the worst human being who has ever lived in the history of humanity, or is he a more or less typical Hollywood producer?

Unknown said...

Ryan's undercarriage was not the problem with "In The Cut". Awful movie! (Albeit with one great line).

Phil 3:14 said...

Rhhardin transitions to troll.

Mattman26 said...

"Nobody knows nothin" was William Goldman in "Tales from the Screen Trade." (He also wrote The Princess Bride, both book and screenplay, which is something.) He was referring to no one in Hollywood having the faintest ability to predict whether a film will succeed or not; but clearly it does have broader application.

Gusty Winds said...

What's with all the pretend shock and outrage. Did anybody think this wasn't going on in Hollywood?

Blah, blah, blah...

jwl said...

Bullying is learned behaviour from parents to children. Either/both pere et mere Weinstein bullied their now rich and powerful bairns, who knows what the grandkids are like.

I am non-lawyer from Canada who knows about Canadian labour law and surely Weinstein Company is about to be sued out of existence? Hostile work environment laws mean Weinstein Company should have done something about Harvey long time ago? 2015 contract that was leaked other day where it was agreed that Harvey could pay large fine to his company while they ignore his behaviour, that makes company accomplice or co-conspirator to serial rapist?

Freeman Hunt said...

If I remember correctly, there is a clip of Harvey Weinstein in Overnight that offers an instructive glimpse into his personality. I couldn't find it on YouTube.

Earnest Prole said...

When the payouts to victims, politicians, Hollywood fixers, etc are all factored in, those were really, really, expensive rolls in the hay for Harvey Weinstein.

Wait, I was reliably told here that his rolls in the hay would have absolutely no economic effects on his company.

The Godfather said...

So we are being asked to believe that the "open secret" (as Rowan Farrow called it) about Harvey wasn't even known by his brother and business partner, just as it was unknown by Meryl and Judy and all those other famous people who were shocked! shocked! to learn that Harvey is an abusive pervert. Maybe that's true; maybe they didn't know. It's possible. It's just hard to believe.

NorthOfTheOneOhOne said...

JAORE said...
But I'm going to attack the NRA, what's a few actresses sprinkled out over 3 decades? Right guys?

Kind of reminds you of OJ vowing to find the real killers, doesn't it?

hombre said...

With a brother like this, who needs enemies?

Look for the elite of the Hollywood sex cult to continue to swarm Harvey. Their hope is that no one will notice that the legendary "casting couch" didn't begin with him.

Lechers, softcore porn divas and exhibitionists as the moral arbiters of our time. We're toast!

Bay Area Guy said...

@William,

Is Harvey Weinstein the worst human being who has ever lived in the history of humanity, or is he a more or less typical Hollywood producer?

Probably, closer to the latter:

If you are high on the Hollywood food chain, i.e., you decide who gets the part; and you see an attractive female actress, whom you'd like to screw;

1. First, Smile and be nice, perhaps flirt, show interest.
2. If that doesn't work, suggest that you can boost her career.
3. If that doesn't work, invite over for massage
4. If that doesn't work, cajole, coax, bully, whine (Harvey wire-tap)
5. If that doesn't work, demand back rub.
6. If that doesn't work, take shower, come out in robe, run around apartment
7. If that doesn't work, well, take what you want by force.

He persisted.

traditionalguy said...

Nice PR job by brother Bob. He pushes Harvey as a unique mentally ill guy. Ergo: he is not a typical Hollywood person. And he needs treatment by Doctors.

But being a sadistic bully is not an illness. it is being the Darwinian fittest person. The Hollywood angle made the producers into fraternity initiation hell week torturers. They extracted humiliation as price of joining the club. And they never ran out of pledges.

whitney said...

He knew. You can't not know. I work in a small family business and one of my family members is a pathological liar and incompetent and I live in fear that they will bring the entire business down.

The Drill SGT said...

Lily Allen’s producer mother experienced disgraced movie mogul Harvey Weinstein’s “sleazeball” nature when she watched a screening of Meg Ryan’s film In The Cut with him.

Alison Owen, who has worked with Weinstein on five movies, makes it clear she was never one of his victims, but she got a taste of what he could be like at his worst back in 2003.


Liberals and Hollywood, but I repeat myself, operate on victim status. Bob Weinstein, wants to be seen as a victim. As does Alison Owen, who needs some victim status.

both don't want to be labeled as accomplices, even though both facilitated Harvey. Over years.

Earnest Prole said...

If sex were Harvey Weinstein’s motivation, he was rich and powerful enough to stick his dick in a different beautiful non-actress twice a day. Instead his raping and obscene exposure were for the purpose of gaining power, which in turn was essential to how he did business. Hence the lack of remorse.

Quaestor said...

It would have been a lot cheaper just to stick with high end call girls.

Ah, but sex with a high-priced prostitute doesn't have that je n'ais c'est quoi of a blowjob administered by a matinee princess, does it?

Jose_K said...

I did not know. Am I my brother's keeper?

Static Ping said...

"...he knows he can't expect any sympathy."

I want to believe this is true. However, we have Hillary Clinton as a key counterexample, who garnered lots of sympathy for enabling her sexual predator of a husband.

William said...

A lot of people get emotional and, in my estimation, overwrought in their discussions of Hitler. However, it must be observed that Hitler was a forceful advocate of strict gun control laws and that he never once masturbated in front of the many female journalists who interviewed him. From this evidence and by the standards now advanced by Hollywood, we can clearly demonstrate that Harvey Weinstein is a worse person than Hitler.

Quaestor said...

Hence the lack of remorse.

The lack of remorse is more easily explained thusly: Harvey Weinstein, run-of-the-mill sociopath.

NorthOfTheOneOhOne said...

The Godfather said...

So we are being asked to believe that the "open secret" (as Rowan Farrow called it) about Harvey wasn't even known by his brother and business partner, just as it was unknown by Meryl and Judy and all those other famous people who were shocked! shocked! to learn that Harvey is an abusive pervert. Maybe that's true; maybe they didn't know. It's possible. It's just hard to believe.

Oh, the knew alright. Hell, they probably even thought it was funny. But why should they care what Harvey did to some wide-eyed twat from Podunk, Nebraska? That's what's really disgusting about this.

Sebastian said...

Bob describes his brother as a sociopath. RH laments the lack of humor.

Anyway, the issue here is not the "grinding up" of women in Hollywood, or the hypocrisy of Hollywood bigshots.

Harvey got protection not because he was a powerful producer but because he had the right politics. Any conservative with similar tastes would have been outed and shunned long ago. So far, his vilification, Bob's sob story included, has served to protect the prog Media-Political Complex. He was a bad man! We didn't know! Or if we did know, we begged him to change! We are all victims! He was bad, very bad! Look at how bad we think he is!

I think women will buy it.

rhhardin said...

Weinstein and Co are just not geniuses in mob control. They had been so far.

Virtue signalling takes over the mob.

Plus some hot-button people.

Earnest Prole said...

The lack of remorse is more easily explained thusly: Harvey Weinstein, run-of-the-mill sociopath.

Exactly.

rhhardin said...

The out for Weinstein Co is a series of gay hero films. They're still sacred.

Sebastian said...

"je n'ais c'est quoi" People! Let's have some standards, here among the deplorables.

rhhardin said...

The Accountant (2016) was good. I rewatched it last night, having forgotten every significant detail. Boy, girl, no sex.

It's completely a boy-gets-girl stand-in story.

Kevin said...

When I heard his admission of feeling remorse for the victims and then him cavalierly, almost crazily saying he was going to go out and take on the NRA, it was so disturbing to me.

Why? Isn’t taking on the NRA and donating to Planned Parenthood how Liberals get their supporters to forgive them for anything?

Earnest Prole said...

The out for Weinstein Co is a series of gay hero films.

Weinstein Co. will shortly cease to exist, so if you were looking forward to its series of gay hero films you'll need to look elsewhere.

Michael K said...

It would have been a lot cheaper just to stick with high end call girls. They'd be happy to watch him shower of fertilize plants for the right price.

Prostitutes, I have read, know that their main business these days is servicing perverts. Girls are so easy to get into bed if you are a young guy and half way decent looking, that only the perverts need to pay.

He got his kicks by humiliating beautiful women. It's kind of the way rapists and serial killers get their kicks.

Nothing about normal sex.

William said...

Was there any agent or director in Hollywood who knew of Harvey's unsavory reputation and shielded their young charges from Harvey's predations? There must be one somewhere. Maybe Spielberg can make a Schindler's List movie about this brave agent. If one doesn't exist, invent one. I see it it as a heart warming, inspiring movie that will help to restore Hollywod's reputation. Tom Hanks in the lead role of course..

David said...

And this statement was necessary because . . . ?

Perhaps so he could show that he is just as classy as his brother.

glenn said...

Like I said the other day if all the folks connected to this thing wound up penniless and living in trailer parks that would be a good thing. Sadly that's unlikely.

tcrosse said...

"...he knows he can't expect any sympathy."

We used to say in the Service that if you're looking for Sympathy, the only place you'll find it is in the dictionary, right between Shit and Syphilis.

bobby said...

Right, nobody knew.

Back in 2013, Seth McFarlane at the Oscars joked that the five nominated actresses "no longer have to pretend to be attracted to Harvey Weinstein."

"No longer HAVE TO pretend . . ."

Sort of implies that they had to before. Sort of implies a coercive situation, no?

And everyone laughed.

Wilbur said...

Until this preceding week I couldn't have identified Harvey Weinstein by name or face, not having attended a movie in over 20 years. That was when I came to the realization that to stick another nickel in the pocket of anyone in this business was very counter-productive to the good of the nation and, therefore, me.

What I find glossed over is that he expected the claim that this was a "right-wing conspiracy" would resonate and that this would blow over. After all, it's time to move on and get back to work for the American people, i.e., fighting the NRA and the business of making those great movies America's so in love with.


I

Gahrie said...

Talk about being thrown under the bus by your brother.....

The Godfather said...

North/101 asks "why should they [Bob W. and everyone else who knew the "open secret" of Harvey's behavior] care what Harvey did to some wide-eyed twat from Podunk, Nebraska?" Even if they didn't care about the wide-eyed twat, they SHOULD have cared if, like Bob, they had a stake in the company. What is happening now to the Weinstein Co. was a foreseeable consequence of Harvey's behavior. Lots of companies go to a lot of trouble to prevent such activities, or at least to create plausible deniability regarding company knowledge and tolerance of them. If Harvey's a psychopath, you wouldn't expect him to rein in his implulses, but if Bob (and many others) knew, they had every incentive to take action to protect the company. Yet they didn't.

Jose_K said...

People:
"Brad Pitt threatened to beat up Harvey Weinstein after his then-girlfriend Gwyneth Paltrow told him that the movie mogul had sexually harassed her."

Earnest Prole said...

What is happening now to the Weinstein Co. was a foreseeable consequence of Harvey's behavior. Lots of companies go to a lot of trouble to prevent such activities, or at least to create plausible deniability regarding company knowledge and tolerance of them.

We’ve seen two competing theories argued in these comments, that companies either should or shouldn’t care about the behavior of their executives. Since one faction seems to believe the free market is sufficient to answer all of society’s questions, I recommend we adopt their approach: If the Weinstein Company’s balance sheet is stronger a year from the date of the Harvey Weinstein revelations, obviously they are right; if the balance sheet is weaker (or, as I predict, nonexistent), they are wrong.

Yancey Ward said...

As guilty as he is, it is very, very clear why Weinstein is being tossed so vigorously now- he is the scapegoat for the rest of the industry. I bet it works. The actors now castigating Weinstein will all sign the next petition to allow Roman Polanski back into the US without fear of prosecution.

Yancey Ward said...

And Bob Weinstein is lying about not knowing about a lot of this if you believe the NYTimes pieces that have appeared- those stories had to either be complete fabrications or sourced from the Weinstein Corporation itself- there is no middle ground here.

tim in vermont said...

Seems like pretending not to know was the glue that held the star making machinery together, and what was beautiful young Joni Mitchell doing in Paris with that old record producer on a respite from making and breaking careers in the music biz?

Sebastian said...

"the free market is sufficient to answer all of society’s questions, I recommend we adopt their approach: If the Weinstein Company’s balance sheet is stronger a year from the date of the Harvey Weinstein revelations, obviously they are right; if the balance sheet is weaker (or, as I predict, nonexistent), they are wrong"

Trouble is, the failure of the company does not refute the proposition that the market suffices. The market will be right to tell the company board and execs that they were wrong.

Same thing with the financial crisis: the market sufficed (until politics messed up the unwinding of bad bets) to tell people they had thought wrong.

Of course, then the question is, what does count as a refutation? Partly depends on what the meaning of "sufficient" is.

NorthOfTheOneOhOne said...

The Godfather said... [hush]​[hide comment]

If Harvey's a psychopath, you wouldn't expect him to rein in his implulses, but if Bob (and many others) knew, they had every incentive to take action to protect the company. Yet they didn't.

Exactly, which is why Bob, Meryl, Dame Judy, Clooney, Damon, etc., have all (at least to me) become somewhat more loathsome that Harvey.

PB said...

Bob should not be speaking w/o a lawyer. They knew? All that remains is how to completely dislodge all their assets ad determine how it's distributed to Harvey's victims.

Mountain Maven said...

Sorry dude, there's no room for u on the victim wagon. Pathetic millionaire.

Mattman26 said...

"Hillary Clinton as a key counterexample, who garnered lots of sympathy . . . ."

Do you suppose she garnered all she could muster?

Bill Peschel said...

Seth MacFarland's "joke" shows that Hollywood knew a lot more about Weinstein than they're saying, and they protected him.

And isn't it funny how the entertainment media heard that same joke and nobody thought to ask, "is it true?"

Comanche Voter said...

There has at least been a suggestion that the Harvey Weinstein "stuff" came out now as part of a fight for control of the Weinstein Company--and that the brother was behind it.

Of course slippng the shiv to Harvey (a fellow who apparently really, really deserves it) sorta blew up in the brother's face. Looks like there may be no viable Weinstein Company to take over after the kerfuffle ends.

glenn said...

"I'm a victim
You're a victim
He's a victim too."

Just a matter of time until Harvey claims victim status. And blames Trump.

Lance said...

Remember when Charlie Sheen and Mel Gibson were the biggest monsters in Hollywood? Good times, good times.

Earnest Prole said...

Trouble is, the failure of the company does not refute the proposition that the market suffices.

I'm not refuting the proposition that the market suffices; I'm refuting the proposition that sexual extortion by an executive is harmless private behavior that has no economic effect on the principal.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Take notice, Trump-enabling/supporting sociopaths: That's what it looks like when someone holds a sociopathic family member accountable for the harms they remorselessly cause - a dynamic that's totally lacking in the First Family.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

We used to say in the Service that if you're looking for Sympathy, the only place you'll find it is in the dictionary, right between Shit and Syphilis.

The exact reason I feel no sympathy for homeless vets. Although I do feel sympathetic to Americans who are fragged by their so-called "brothers." This is a country that believes it's own weak and dispossessed should be eaten alive and that war for its own sake is a good thing. The idea that someone thinks service to a country as cruel to its own as this one would mean that they'd nonetheless be taken care of is insane. The only people who deserve to be thanked for their "service" are those who improved the system, like FDR and other leaders. Enlisting today is just pledging your allegiance to a known satanic entity that simply finds usefulness in your willingness to kill on its behalf.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

I think you're right, Earnest Prole @1:21 PM.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

I double-dog dare all the sweet young feminists, do-gooders, SJWs, etc., and their sudden conservative "allies" to find the alchemy that they think will produce a producer as award-winning as Weinstein and as well-behaved as a choir boy in the same person. Just won't happen. And a woman producer won't do it, either. Good art thrives off of conflict, and this douchebag had it in spades. He had the aggression that drove that conflict (and sex drive!) and the smarm and charm to channel it into identifying compelling human art-dramas before anyone else could perceive them. Women, and feminized men for that matter, just want stability and security. I'm sorry to say but there's probably a reason that his personality type thrived in Hornywood. Because its all about making a business out of a gorgeous human drama. You want to look at a screen for 120 minutes? The actor had better be good-looking. You want them to stay interested? Make the drama compelling. So this guy was the consummate (no pun intended) businessman at making a product out of both and all these white knights are surprised that he exploited and dipped into the honey at that hive? Even aggressively? Get a clue! How much less harshly was he supposed to negotiate with the honeys than he did with all the other businesses? The guy was creepy and ugly and seemed to cross several moral and legal boundaries but aside from that - when it comes to the general nature/culture of the business, how naive must you people be?

As I already said, there was probably a reason that the Romans considered actors and prostitutes as occupying the same social stratum.... Producers are simply the pimps in this analogy.

Molly said...

I have a sincere question (this is not ironic or sarcastic): Does this kind of "sex play for roles" occur in New York City where there are a lot of beautiful young actors who want serious acting jobs and where there are a lot of older men who actually have input into the decisions about who gets those serious acting jobs. If so, why isn't there more public attention to this issue. If not (and this is what I think is the case, but I'm just guessing), why is the movie business so different from the stage acting business?

Possible explanations:

1. The money is so much greater in Hollywood, so women are willing to put with (or men expect them to be willing to put up with) ugly behavior because the financial rewards are so great. (Or NYC actors care about "art" more than Hollywood actors.)
2. It's the "culture". (That shirley temple story -- see Maureen Dowd's column on this -- is just horrifying.) On the other hand, the movie "the producers" makes it appear that "casting couch" is common in NYC.

And no matter how conservative you are in your politics, it is indisputably a fact that there are some sectors of our economy where "everybody knows" (victims and victimizers) that attractive young women (especially, but also attractive young men) are expected to "put out" to achieve success. I have never seen this in my profession (higher education) and so I probably was inclined to think it wasn't very common. And certainly physical attractiveness is more important in acting professions than in most other professions. But it is a serious condemnation of the American culture if even a small number of young women believe with evidence that their career choices involve tradeoffs like those Weinstein demanded.

Larry Nelson said...

"The only people who deserve to be thanked for their "service" are those who improved the system, like FDR and other leaders. Enlisting today is just pledging your allegiance to a known satanic entity that simply finds usefulness in your willingness to kill on its behalf."

Political leaders serve themselves.
What's the biggest sacrifice you have made in your toothless life?

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

What's the biggest sacrifice you have made in your toothless life?

Not risking my life for anyone who never gave a damn about me (including that same BIG GOVERNMENT that you conservatives don't trust) and giving my time, love, blood, sweat and tears to people who actually cared about me instead. Reciprocity is a good thing. Much better than hierarchy.

The Godfather said...

@Earnest Prole: If you know any executives of major corporations who believe "the proposition that sexual extortion by an executive is harmless private behavior that has no economic effect on the principal", I would consider coming out of retirement to counsel them. I'd make a mint off the fools.

If I were younger, I'd ask you for an introduction to some employees of such corporations and make even more of a mint.

Earnest Prole said...

@ Godfather: Head for Hollywood.

Bad Lieutenant said...

As I already said, there was probably a reason that the Romans considered actors and prostitutes as occupying the same social stratum.... Producers are simply the pimps in this analogy.


That's fine. I'd be quite content if the Hollywooders would just grind their sausage and make their product and stop moralizing to the rest of us. Let anybody who wants to rape or be raped, by all means, go to Hollywood.

n.n said...

This is not an expose of transgender homosexuals preying on young boys and girls in the entertainment industry. That will be suppressed for the sake of the selected politically favored congruence ("=").

Martin said...

Just remember that 3 weeks ago, Harvey Weinstein was a respected and loved Hollywood producer and no one had a bad word to say about him.

How many more? Not just Hollywood, but business, not-for-profits, politics, other arts, educators, on and on.

The only thing that is unique about Hollywood is that some of the people, the on-screen talent, are especially physically attractive by current standards. Otherwise, every field is the same zoo populated by the same semi-evolved apes playing the same scripts with local variations.

I am not saying this to excuse Weinstein, but to observe that in looking at the people "at the top" in all areas, they are all more or less depraved and they all lie, all the time, about everything. We have seen one tiny corner of one smallish industry pulled back to give us a fleeting glimpse of what goes on--don't think the rest of Hollywood is better, or that the rest of the world is different or better, among the people at the top level.

Speaking of films, time to re-visit "Fellini Satyricon" in the context of Western culture and elites in 2017.

dustbunny said...

I think Althouse alluded the other day to the fact that none of this would have ever come out if Hillary had won. Harvey thought he owned the gatekeepers but he was trumped.

Narayanan Subramanian said...

Do the details sum up to anything more than HW was a "flasher" who held power enough to make his audience watch and not just walk away

Narayanan Subramanian said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
tim in vermont said...

and their sudden conservative "allies"

Let's just say for the sake of argument, that conservatives are in favor of sexual harassment and rape, and not just in favor of giving due process to those accused, and harshly punishing those who are found guilty, let's just say that. What you are saying then is that 'We will not be held to our own standards!"

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Leftists cannot muster a single word of derision towards the foul Democrat Weinstein.

Noted.

Bad Lieutenant said...


Blogger Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...
Leftists cannot muster a single word of derision towards the foul Democrat Weinstein.

Noted.
10/15/17, 7:49 AM


Well,it would be sour grapes. They don't want to seem jealous, which they are.

Bad Lieutenant said...


Narayanan Subramanian said...
Do the details sum up to anything more than HW was a "flasher" who held power enough to make his audience watch and not just walk away


And you are quite correct. Rose McGowan, whom I would wish to treat tenderly for perhaps no good reason, says HW raped her flat out. Right?

But is that some sterile corner or border of the rape laws, or was it p-i-v rape-rape, or did he drug her, or what? Cause Harvey, in all these encounters, is no more than a parody of LBJ, flashing and urinating in public, taking meetings on the toilet and womanizing to far outdo JFK.

But whereas LBJ was a hound, HW is merely a wanker. Has he ever had a fuck worth giving? Or is it the passage of time and he used to be more physical 20 years ago before his inevitable health issues. Nobody has seen fit to say "Harvey Weinstein screwed me and it was the night of my life."


I don't know what bix cvvv thinks Rose McGowan lied about, but I wish he'd say so.

Bad Lieutenant said...

The really terrible stuff in sex that people talk about without reading, like Marquis De Sade? That stuff is actually repulsive to any normal person without being all "moral."

The catch is that they go through all these different perversions, and that's all they are - it's a variation on same thing. The perversion is enacted, and the pervert, for whose pleasure this is enacted by the victims, achieves climax by masturbating self or possibly others. What other repugnance to any normal human. Rape in comparison is almost understandable.

Was it a morbid compulsion from childhood or other trauma? Some ugly duckling compensation? He wasn't raised by wolves either - a shonda; good thing his parents are dead.

He was not alone, was not the worst, like vermin-when you see one, there's twenty-five you can't see. This is a breach in a wall of silence and should be exploited fully.

This isn't all about him.

Freeman Hunt said...

I did not remember correctly. Watched Overnight again tonight, having only otherwise seen it a decade or so ago. Wenstein is not really in it. There's only a lot of talk about him.