FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

Harvey Weinstein defence

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Harvey Weinsteins lawyers are using the defence that the women he had sex with over the past years wasn’t abuse because they took the conscious decision to have sex with him in order to further their career.

So, did Harvey use his power to get what he wanted from the women? Or did they use his power to get what they wanted?

Personally I still say Harvey is to blame and he used his power for his own gains. But at the same time, it’s possible a couple of them women who have made complaints against could have also used him.

Your thoughts?

(Id also like to say I don’t agree with it either way and that as a superior figure, Harvey should have known better and he should rot for a good while)

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icecouple561Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

East Sussex

There are probably women who did use his penis as a stepping stone but I suspect they are the minority.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


" There are probably women who did use his penis as a stepping stone but I suspect they are the minority."

I agree with this

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

What always get me is that these people are loaded and could have paid for what they wanted privately

He deserves to be prosecuted for being a fucking cheap skate

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound


"What always get me is that these people are loaded and could have paid for what they wanted privately

He deserves to be prosecuted for being a fucking cheap skate "

Paying robs him of the power trip thrill.

As to the OP, I don't think it's as simple as that, even if some did make a conscious decision to "accept" the advances. The defence is interesting because nearly all remained silent, no matter what they experienced or felt about it, to keep their careers.

That's power.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"What always get me is that these people are loaded and could have paid for what they wanted privately

He deserves to be prosecuted for being a fucking cheap skate

Paying robs him of the power trip thrill.

As to the OP, I don't think it's as simple as that, even if some did make a conscious decision to "accept" the advances. The defence is interesting because nearly all remained silent, no matter what they experienced or felt about it, to keep their careers.

That's power.

"

Isn’t it just?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

He's a power hungry, manipulative piece of shit.

The only problem I have with any of the women is why did they take so long to come forward?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *entileschiWoman
over a year ago

Norwich

As a guy said on Panorama, this is a filthy stable, but Weinstein has taken the biggest dump in it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"As a guy said on Panorama, this is a filthy stable, but Weinstein has taken the biggest dump in it."

Yes I saw that, he just summed it up.. didn't he.

Because there are more individuals like Harvey but they are not being blamed yet

.. yet

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *hetalkingstoveMan
over a year ago

London


"He's a power hungry, manipulative piece of shit.

The only problem I have with any of the women is why did they take so long to come forward?

"

Why didn't women who work in the film industry come forward with allegations against someone who was extremely powerful in the film industry?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Some gained personally from liaisons with him, to the degree they wanted to who knows but that’s not at his door.

What lays at his door are the unveiled conversations of what happens if someone doesn’t conform to his requests.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo

Probably a bit of both. If I had been asked to have sex with someone and I didn't want to then I would say no even to further a career

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The problem with Weinstein isn't the guy.

There are an infinite number of guys, myself included, who have done something creepy when they were younger. Not crimes, but something verging on unethical with sex.

That's because they don't see a route to getting what they want and still are going crazy about sex. Women aren't angels either - some have done some semi-psychotic things to ensure they get a relationship they envisage.

Society, institutions, morality, whole bunch of stuff that is hard to describe - it moderates and holds back the worst of this behaviour.

I repeat the problem with Weinstein isn't the guy.

Look at the consistent pattern of Christian/Muslim/Jewish religious institutions, the same pattern replicated with secular NGOs, where older men mostly, [edited] the kids. If anything Weinstein is a mild example of this pattern, there are genuine monsters beyond forgiveness.

In every case, including Weinstein: people knew, lots of them.

The reason why it continues is that in-group preference is considered more important than predatory behaviour. In Cork when I was a small child I had a friend of the same age I used to go on playdates with, decades later I find his dad is in prison for [edited] him. I suspect that my parent's religion is the true culprit because it assisted, as it did in dozens of other similar cases, in cover ups. These people aren't evil - but they are a combination of naive, stupid and have high in-group preference that prevents them getting predators to desist before it turns into criminal behaviour.

In the case of Weinstein, his coworkers will be hyperaware of the protected status members of the in-group get. This is because "it makes us all look bad" aka "The Media will blame the Jews!". That's not right but that's how it would have been rationalized.

The tighter in-group preference (which isn't always evil, that's not what I'm saying_, the worst these cases tend to be because of the naivety and then accompanying predation.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

His activity was so prolific and immediately shocking and discussed by high profile professionals that I'm inclined to think that he was out of control as an abusive sex pest. His position, if nothing else, gave him power, which should not have been abused. It's perhaps likely that some wannabes somewhere who wanted to break into that world could have endured it in the hope of a career break - but the abuser moves first.

Some people are just sickening pests, which becomes a major danger when they have power.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *agneto.Man
over a year ago

Bham

People have talked about the Hollywood casting couch forever, hell yes some of these women knew what they were doing, or were very naive. But he definitely crossed a line, especially with office employees but doubt he's the only one.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound


"People have talked about the Hollywood casting couch forever, hell yes some of these women knew what they were doing, or were very naive. But he definitely crossed a line, especially with office employees but doubt he's the only one."

If he was the only one it's more likely people would have challenged him. When it's an accepted norm it's harder to challenge.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *laytimenowMan
over a year ago

Essex


"

The problem with Weinstein isn't the guy.

There are an infinite number of guys, myself included, who have done something creepy when they were younger. Not crimes, but something verging on unethical with sex.

That's because they don't see a route to getting what they want and still are going crazy about sex. Women aren't angels either - some have done some semi-psychotic things to ensure they get a relationship they envisage.

Society, institutions, morality, whole bunch of stuff that is hard to describe - it moderates and holds back the worst of this behaviour.

I repeat the problem with Weinstein isn't the guy.

Look at the consistent pattern of Christian/Muslim/Jewish religious institutions, the same pattern replicated with secular NGOs, where older men mostly, [edited] the kids. If anything Weinstein is a mild example of this pattern, there are genuine monsters beyond forgiveness.

In every case, including Weinstein: people knew, lots of them.

The reason why it continues is that in-group preference is considered more important than predatory behaviour. In Cork when I was a small child I had a friend of the same age I used to go on playdates with, decades later I find his dad is in prison for [edited] him. I suspect that my parent's religion is the true culprit because it assisted, as it did in dozens of other similar cases, in cover ups. These people aren't evil - but they are a combination of naive, stupid and have high in-group preference that prevents them getting predators to desist before it turns into criminal behaviour.

In the case of Weinstein, his coworkers will be hyperaware of the protected status members of the in-group get. This is because "it makes us all look bad" aka "The Media will blame the Jews!". That's not right but that's how it would have been rationalized.

The tighter in-group preference (which isn't always evil, that's not what I'm saying_, the worst these cases tend to be because of the naivety and then accompanying predation."

Im sorry it is the Man .

Weinstein just happens to be another 1 of those particular types.

Its about being in control , having the power.

" Just do it this once & i'll never bother you again "

The Man is a C*#t .

___________________

Any man who tries in anyway to excuse his crimes is in danger of falling into the same Category .

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

Im sorry it is the Man .

Weinstein just happens to be another 1 of those particular types.

Its about being in control , having the power.

" Just do it this once & i'll never bother you again "

The Man is a C*#t .

___________________

Any man who tries in anyway to excuse his crimes is in danger of falling into the same Category .

"

There is something of a philosophical chicken and egg problem here.

My position is that human nature can't easily be changed but can be shaped - so the shortest route to preventing harm is to police the institutions.

I think human nature can potentially be modified with genetic engineeering, that we do an awful job of policing institutions (yet better than most societies - in a truly corrupted society there is no outcry) but these are other subjects.

The ideal world contains the right people and the right institutions, you can see a vague approximation of what they might look like when you compare societies around the world = it's plain that the Japanese are at one end and Brazil is at the other end. In Japan the level of crime is so tiny it's turning into a problem that the police have nothing to do and harm does not come to the most vulnerable as they walk almost any street.

This makes Westerners uncomfortable - their instinct of organizations like the BBC is to rationalize what are really conspiracy theories about Japan- when actually the real trouble is plainly that our society is degenerating - a topic they do not want to handle under any circumstances because as I said already - they are part of the in-group, they are part of the problem. It is not some odd coincidence that the BBC refused to report on Rotherham and also that Wikipedia has an entry like this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_sexual_abuse_cases

Think people are starting to join the dots here. The public is corrupted.

By a corrupt public I'm not talking of an abstract - there's plenty of evidence available right here if you look for it.

I am arguing in another thread that HIV positive people should declare their status because it otherwise increases the probability of passing a life threatening illness.

A good percentage of the forum believes that places me as a 'discriminator' of some sort.

This is very leaky logic, and it explains why the far right now use the word 'poz' or 'pozzed' to refer to people and institutions who promote and this is a quote: "propagation of culture degeneracy, filth, freakishness, and antipathy toward normal, psychologically healthy humans."

I think this attitude is real, how else do you explain a subgroup of people on Fab who clearly believe that a HIV infected person has a 'human right' of some sort to spread the contagion.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"He's a power hungry, manipulative piece of shit.

The only problem I have with any of the women is why did they take so long to come forward?

Why didn't women who work in the film industry come forward with allegations against someone who was extremely powerful in the film industry?"

Yes, why didnt they come forward?

They were ok with doing anything to further their careers and get rich.

Did their morals finally kick in after they were rich and famous?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *evil_u_knowMan
over a year ago

city

Its hollywood.

Why do you tink american actors are so awful. That Tom Hardy, who lets be honest, is jut okay, stands out above most american actors by head and shoulders.

The men use their position to get sex.

The women use sex to get their position.

Trust me, there are countless daniel day lewis, or tom hardys in america both male and female who are not in films, because someone who sucks cock took their job.

THEY are the real victims.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"He's a power hungry, manipulative piece of shit.

The only problem I have with any of the women is why did they take so long to come forward?

Why didn't women who work in the film industry come forward with allegations against someone who was extremely powerful in the film industry?

Yes, why didnt they come forward?

They were ok with doing anything to further their careers and get rich.

Did their morals finally kick in after they were rich and famous?"

As soon as it became fashionable in Celebrityville to be a victim, but I still think he abused a position of power and is a piece of shit..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top