To hav3 had enough of Harvey Weinstein on the radio

And let’s not get personal. If you can’t make your point withoit resorting to what you see as insults, then that’s a failing.

Get off your high horse GG

These women were only ‘vulnerable’ in as much as it affected their careers. They had a choice and could have reported him, indeed many did. They chose to keep quiet unlike little children in care homes who had nobody.

lot not lost

A lost of famous people distancing themselves from him now, who were probably previously sucking up to him to get jobs.

not your usual victim types, they include famous actress, news anchors, female film makers, and the like

What the * are your "usual victim types". No wonder there is so much prejudice against survivors

A lot of the emotive comments expressed on this subject is just so unpleasant, thoughtless and without any understanding of what being vulnerable to someone in power can do to you.

I will leave you to your superiority and victim blaming.

kitty the women who are now coming forward are not your usual victim types, they include famous actress, news anchors, female film makers, and the like.

My reaction is one of almost disbelief that these strong women just le the matter go, even though it was common knowledge about this man. I simply don’t believe that they were traumatised in the same way a vulnerable child would be, having listened to victims of child abuse and compared them to the way these women are coming forward now. Indeed they are not actually claiming it has completely affected their lives but rather that it was a distasteful incident that they wish they’d done something about earlier.

In my work, protection of vulnerable people is mandatory training on the protection of those deemed as vulnerable. It includes children, those in hospital, the elderly, etc. So, my opinion has some basis to it. Regardless, my opinion stands.

The women who are able to say no are very lucky to have the strength of personality to do so but predators seem to be able to sense the vulnerable which makes children an easier target.

But, no one can actually say with absolute certainty which victim has been the most affected.

It's and opinion based purely on what I would see as misguided emotion MissAdventure as you admit it is not based on knowledge or experience.

Different circumstances will bring about different results but on the whole such comparisons are odious and do not improve the situation for either the children or the adults.

I agree with anya. Children are the most vulnerable in society. I'm not a psychologist, and haven't been raped: its opinion. That is also why paedophilia is reviled by society. Its the ultimate in dominating someone who has no way of reporting, resisting, or in some cases even knowing its wrong.

However there is a big difference between the effect of the abuse on a young, vulnerable and totally helpless child and a fully grown woman who went along with the ‘casting’ couch to further her career.

Please tell me what your qualifications are for saying this? Are you a qualified psychologist? psychiatrist? or have you been raped as a child and then again as an adult when someone was using their power over your ability to get work to do this so that you are in a position to compare? How easy it is to suggest the brave 'nos' are the answer when it is not you in that position.

Noticeably Anya, you are just as anonymous - with your comments about other posters - as we all are.

....and when being anonymous allows some to deride anyone whose views we disagree with.

If we only discussed things on GN that were backed up by evidence some threads would be very empty

No worry about that maryeliza. We live in a time where emoters are in the ascendance and reason and expertise - which would reveal the facts - are derided. So gossip will thrive for as long as you need it to I would guess.

I agree about the prominence this awful man and his alleged crimes has been given. There is much more going on in the world.
Seems like another case of the show business world accepting if not condoning this type if behaviour.

Both men used their position of power to abuse. However there is a big difference between the effect of the abuse on a young, vulnerable and totally helpless child and a fully grown woman who went along with the ‘casting’ couch to further her career. From those actresses who had spoken out it would seek several told him ‘no’ in no uncertain terms.

and there’s nothing wrong with speculating about the role of his wife in all this.

If you just wish to emote about what has happened there is nothing wrong with being influenced by gossip maryeliza.

However, if you want to understand and stop whatever allowed this to happen and allowed predatory males over and over again, in many and varied circumstances, to be successful not just once but many, many times it will take take a proper viewing of the facts - not gossip. The only thing we can do is shout out these people and their enablers if we should see them.

"There's nothing wrong with speculating about the role of his wife in all this". What does that mean, what role did she play? The focus is on his disgusting behaviour. So far as I'm aware, no one is suggesting his wife has sexually assaulted or bullied young men or women who were seeking to work in her fashion business.

If we only discussed things on GN that were backed up by evidence some threads would be very empty. With the revelations about HW and the length of time they cover, its perfectly reasonable to speculate as to what his wife knew and when - just as I would speculate as to when the Board knew and when. Silly point about being a Tiller Girl

there’s nothing wrong with speculating about the role of his wife in all this. Well, there is if there's no substance to the speculation surely? Without some kind of show of evidence it's just gossip isn't it? You might as well say she was a Tiller Girl in the 1950s. No evidence to that either; just "speculation".

GG there’s a lot of gossip around about the whole matter and there’s nothing wrong with speculating about the role of his wife in all this.

Why is it a funny thing Chew? I’ve never said it shouldn’t be talked about just about it being the lead on the news, I think it’s been an interesting thread with some interesting posts:

Funny thing is that the OP was annoyed that HW had been given 19 minutes of air time on national news and more besides. And now he's been given another 5 hours--and counting-- on GN.

Re his wife - some say she’s more worried about the impact on her business. She knew and heard nothing until this week? ????

Is listening to gossip helpful?

I do not agree with you Maryeliza.

Yes there is.If you work in health, social services, police service, you will be dealing sometimes with people who are victims of one kind or another. Whilst all have needs and are valid victims and deserve help and support, it is impossible
to treat them all equally - instead you will do your best to treat them fairly which means prioritising. So for example, a 12 year old in care from god knows what dreadful background abused by CS has a higher priority as a victim than any of HW’s victims. In an ideal world with infinite resources all victims would be treated equally but that’s a complete impossibility.