To hav3 had enough of Harvey Weinstein on the radio

Hello GracesGran, we seem to be supporting each others point of view on this thread - which isn't always the case is it.
I'm bewildered by the notion that those of us who express understanding, empathy as well as recognising the clear pattern described by so many women as that of a serial abuser, are somehow letting down the sisterhood, or suggesting no women ever lie, or are suggesting that all men are predators.
I hope most of us have seen the interview with Emma Thompson- go Emma.

few - should have read "few of these"

Well the fact that you don't understand what the sisterhood has to do with it says a lot about you and your knowledge of the women's movement. They have always advocated speaking out immediately about any abuse or coercion because failing to do so means that other women may be subjected to the same treatment. Obviously the women involved put their own careers above the protection of other women. So not supportive.
Taking money to keep quiet is another thing. If it. happened if you care about other women you speak out you don't settle for a cash pay out.
As for women not being honest, there are no posts on here questioning what might have happened, the assumption seems to be that they have said he did it so he must have done it..
It's fine to be sympathetic and understanding Iam64 but a little balance and a belief that someone is innocent until proved guilty might be good as well.
I don't know what happened. I don't know what negotiations went on and what was given or taken for any contact, unwelcome or not. Neither does anyone else.
There is undoubtedly a sexist element in the industry
As for Emma Thompson- her last remark says it all - "Does it count if you do it to one woman once - I think it does." If women had reported these instances immediately then it might have stopped. This isn't victim blaming simply asking women to use the system which is there now. It wasn't in the past.
How can we ask children to speak out if adult women don't or won't?

What nasty, judgemental remarks you come out with trisher. There is no way that someone dealing with people who they believe may have been subjected to sexual coercion or rape would put the sort of pressure on that you suggest "the sisterhood" would; it would be totally counterproductive. The fact that you even think anyone who has any knowledge or insight into these cases would agree to put pressure on people in this situation shows just how little you understand or can empathise.

Of course speaking out as early as possible helps not only other possible victims but also the case the current victim has but I imagine there are people watching the unfolding of this who have kept quiet for decades - because comment like yours and the way they know they will be seen make it impossible to do otherwise.

Survivors who speak out about their assault are often punished for doing so when they are subjected to negative reactions such as yours. These negative comments serve only to silence the women involved so all you are doing is continuing the probability that the next person will not speak out.

Negative reaction by professionals stops people after the first disclosure - probably why some of the women took the money as that was the only justice they could see themselves getting. Negative reaction from people who comment reinforces the often already present self-blame. Negative comments such as yours will only add to the burden of people (not just the ones currently in the news) who have been abused or raped.

In 1995 over 20 years ago and around about the time the Weinsteins were becoming powerful a woman called Monica Lewinsky spoke out against the most powerful man in the USA. These women could have done the same. In the 1980s when some of this is alleged to have taken place the Weinsteins were only just making films- no strength, no reputation, no big business.
If they were so traumatised does the $100,000 make them less so?
It astonishes me that this trial by media on the basis of testimony that hasn't been questioned, that is historic and that arguably has been given by women who seek financial gain is regarded as a basis for condemning me because I said women should be empowered and speak out. If women do not learn to speak out, if we accept that women who are treated badly by men must just accept it and not speak out then abuse will continue. And if these women were so traumatised isn't astonishing that they choose to speak to the press.

I fully agree Trisha and I doubt they are all speaking the truth, some are but not all . I have said in an earlier post, one woman has claimed raped but went on to have an affair with her alleged rapist

I doubt the polarised views here will be resolved.

Firstly, the woman who claimed to have been raped but 'went on to have an affair with her alleged rapist' wasn't the first and won't be the last, unfortunately. Stockholm syndrome anyone>

The feminists who campaigned for funding and set up women's refugees and support services for women who were sexually abused as children or in adult life would never have taken a judgemental view of women who didn't feel empowered enough to speak out. I'm shocked that any one could take such a judgemental, critical approach to the large number of complainants. Yes, they're allegations, the only ones he seems to dispute are the allegations of rape. He says the sexual encounters were consensual - absolutely not what any of his accusers say.
To suggest we should wait for a trial because some posters "doubt" that all the women are telling the truth is to take the side of a man who acknowledges he needs treatment, who talks about 'sex addiction' - what price the sisterhood now.

None of what you are saying makes sense trisher. Of course, if someone can speak out they should be supported in doing so but you have no idea of how distressed they may have been or how violated they felt.

You do not know if they more frightened of people like you and fear that most rape victims who try to report their assaults are called liars or even worse are treated to the sort of comments you make. Who are you to tell them they have to be able to cope with that? What is important that the receive the right advice and support - and no rape support group would say what you are saying.

I have actually never heard such thoughtlessness and lack of understanding on this subject. Your thinking lacks any reflection. You are attacking those who couldn't speak out but are the very reason why people don't with your nasty innuendo about those who did. Is there any one in this position who you are not prepared to disparage, belittle and diminish.

Maybe Monica Lewinsky is part of the reason why women haven't spoken out before now. She was vilified and shamed from here to Christmas and back and is still subject to cyber bullying 20+ years on.

In fact, I'm not sure ML did speak out anyway. Wasn't she 'outed' by another person, Linda Tripp?

So many men and indeed boys do not understand what consensual means Iam, so I am really not surprised that he believes that having made people say yes this is consensual.

Listening to the radio in the car this afternoon Women's Hour was talking about the need to instruct boy's and young men rather than the automatic need to blame girls. There was one boy in some classes that were held who's girlfriend would not perform the sex act he asked her to - she said no. He then threatened to send naked photos of her that she had shared with him to all their friends and he believed that her then performing the act was consensual. He did not understand that the absence of the word "no" does not constitute sexual consent.

I can see that, if he is that sort of man, HW could well have persuaded himself that this was consensual sex when legally it was not. However, we will not know unless and until he is brought to trial.

Oh well said SueDonim

Thank you, GracesGranMK2. I like your arguments, too!

Here is another example of what happens when a woman speak out. This is from a BBC news report tonight.

"On Wednesday, US prosecutors defended their decision not to take action against Weinstein in 2015 after Italian model Ambra Battilana Gutierrez, then 22, alleged that he had touched her inappropriately.
A subsequent sting operation recorded the producer repeatedly attempting to coerce Battilana Gutierrez, but the Manhattan district attorney's office said the audio was "insufficient to prove a crime"."

So what exactly are women supposed to do? Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

For those who ask the question 'Why didn't she...?' here are the answers, in a Guardian article. In fact, it's the wrong question anyway; it needs to be 'Why did he...?'

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/14/after-weinstein-stop-asking-women-to-answer-for-sex-predators-crimes?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

To suggest we wait for a trial is being judgemental and taking the side of the man? Really ? And deciding every woman is telling the truth is not being judgemental ? Women never ever falsely accused, the woman who was recently jailed for false allegations which caused one man to be imprisoned was telling the truth and her trial was just defence of the accused men?

I have never defended the man, but I do not believe every woman who is claiming rape is telling the truth.

Glad the Academy has kicked him out. But he is just one and there are bound to be others. Sad and tawdry and this will roll on and on. Sadly it has all the elements that for many make 'good' TV.

To suggest we wait for a trial is being judgemental and taking the side of the man? Really?

If you are going to make such allegations please quote exactly where this has been said. I do not believe it has. Nor has anyone suggested -every- women is telling the truth. Perhaps reading again without the prejudice towards some posters would help.

Well said trisher

What, exactly, that trisher said was 'well said' Anya? I am fascinated.

Why should I try to explain to you GG? To be honest I CBA’d as it would be a waste of time.

Or you just can't find anything actually acceptable in what she is saying? Much more likely having read the post.

No, I just can’t be bothered to discuss with the likes of you.

I not respond to those who are prepared to enter into debate. There are several on here, such as Sue and Iam64 who are expressing opinion I don’t particularly agree with, but who, at least express their views without resorting to rudeness. I’d be quite happy to enter into debate with them.

"The likes of me" what on earth do you mean by that? The likes of me is just another member of GN!

If you don't believe I have entered the debate I have to question if you have actually read the thread or just come on to 'like' your little friends posts. I believe this is an incredibly point in the position of women and the entitlement of men so I have gone over the points Trisher has made. Interestingly Sue and Iam have both commented positively on my posts.

Have you actually read anything?

I think that proves my point

Just listen to the tone of your posts.

You actually can't hear the 'tone' of my posts Anya. I have no doubt the 'tone' of anyone who disagrees with those who try to paint as transactional, the abuse and coercion of women, will always be heard differently to what the writer heard when they wrote it.

So which bit of trishers post would you like to discuss because you agree with it?