The All-Purpose, Hollywood Sexual Accusation Thread

[Calaigah]

I don't know, but just because he said that people are already comparing him to Weinstein... so I guess he is right.

Are people really comparing him to Weinstein? Not reading the twitter replies since that site gives me a headache.

[AcesX1X]

not true. no one is comparing him to weinstein. that is a highly inappropriate statement to make and isn't even close.

someone is accusing him of helping to cover up the cw drama and taken the time to thread his comments together to provide context.

the two are not even remotely similar.

[Digifiend]

If he covered stuff up, he's a conspirator in this nasty business.

[Calaigah]

not true. no one is comparing him to weinstein. that is a highly inappropriate statement to make and isn't even close.

someone is accusing him of helping to cover up the cw drama and taken the time to thread his comments together to provide context.

the two are not even remotely similar.

Good! And the highlighted is def right!

Hope he goes anyway.

[cranger]

Are people really comparing him to Weinstein? Not reading the twitter replies since that site gives me a headache.

not true. no one is comparing him to weinstein. that is a highly inappropriate statement to make and isn't even close.

someone is accusing him of helping to cover up the cw drama and taken the time to thread his comments together to provide context.

the two are not even remotely similar.

All the twitter feed is doing is comparing him to Weinstein. It is right there. I got pretty far into it, like really far, without seeing a single tweet that even tried to connect any of this with covering anything up. Did we even read the same stuff?

[Calaigah]

All the twitter feed is doing is comparing him to Weinstein. It is right there. I got pretty far into it, like really far, without seeing a single tweet that even tried to connect any of this with covering anything up. Did we even read the same stuff?

No. I said I don't read twitter. That's why I asked.

[cranger]

No. I said I don't read twitter. That's why I asked.

Sorry, the question part of that was meant to just be directed to AcesX1X.

[donpricetag]

lol Guggie is not Weinstein. Stop it. However, I don't like we're getting to the point where people can just destroy other peoples lives because of an accusation. Let's hope it all stays above board.

[AcesX1X]

All the twitter feed is doing is comparing him to Weinstein. It is right there. I got pretty far into it, like really far, without seeing a single tweet that even tried to connect any of this with covering anything up. Did we even read the same stuff?

the OP allegation is just full of "i'm sorry this happened to you" comments on the link

the twitter link i posted on is full of "what is reverse sexism?" "what is NOT ALL MEN?"


i was disturbed by his reverse sexism tweet the other day, but i gave him a pass bc i want to support him. but after seeing the OP and the rest, i cannot ignore the signs any longer.

if he has done this, he should apologize and marvel needs to decide what they will do.

[cranger]

the OP allegation is just full of "i'm sorry this happened to you" comments on the link

the twitter link i posted on is full of "what is reverse sexism?" "what is NOT ALL MEN?"


i was disturbed by his reverse sexism tweet the other day, but i gave him a pass bc i want to support him. but after seeing the OP and the rest, i cannot ignore the signs any longer.

if he has done this, he should apologize and marvel needs to decide what they will do.

So... this is your way of acknowledging that the twitter link provided by two others in this thread (which is a response to his tweet) is comparing him to Weinstein?

[AcesX1X]

further, just because guggenheim isn't weinstein (RIDICULOUS claim with the evidence we have), doesn't somehow absolve him of the rest. which is the OP topic and purpose of this thread.

weinstein is not the litmus for inappropriate behavior (or harassing actions).

So... this is your way of acknowledging that the twitter link provided by two others in this thread (which is a response to his tweet) is comparing him to Weinstein?

no, this is me rejecting your whattaboutisms to divert from the purpose of this thread

[cranger]

further, just because guggenheim isn't weinstein (RIDICULOUS claim with the evidence we have), doesn't somehow absolve him of the rest. which is the OP topic and purpose of this thread.

weinstein is not the litmus for inappropriate behavior (or harassing actions).



no, this is me rejecting your whattaboutisms to divert from the purpose of this thread

You asked the question, I answered. Why would you reject an answer to your own question and accuse me of diverting?

[AcesX1X]

You asked the question, I answered. Why would you reject an answer to your own question and accuse me of diverting?

nope, you said "i guess he is right" to his own question of "reverse sexism" and all men getting painted by a weinstein brush.

he knows that not ALL men are getting painted with a weinstein brush, and he knows there is no such thing as "reverse sexism."

guggenheim himself may be getting painted by some with a weinstein brush, but that's a far cry from "painting all men with a weinstein brush" as he himself said. and you know this as well, you knew this when you typed "i guess he is right."

lastly, pointing out a man's sexist behavior/inappropriate actions does not equal "getting painted with a weinstein brush." that's certainly not what this thread is doing that i have seen.

[salarta]

this is NOT unfounded.

the other day i saw guggenheim state something about "REVERSE SEXISM" (what is that??) on his twitter. why would he say that when he knows 'all men' are not being painted with a "weinstein brush?"

https://twitter.com/mguggenheim/stat...15593624014849

I don't know, but just because he said that people are already comparing him to Weinstein... so I guess he is right.

"Reverse sexism" is one of those phrases that's a warning sign for everyone else concerning whoever chooses to use it. Most of the people who use phrases like that turn out to be pretty terrible people in general. The phrase itself is built on the idea that discrimination toward men for simply being men is some kind of widespread phenomenon, and that what men go through during any cases of genuine discrimination is on par with both the severity and prevalence of what women go through.

There's a history to this kind of language that is very much not pretty and does not bode well for Guggenheim's image. It's language that was rampant several years ago from sexists who set about doxxing and SWATting mostly women, trying to get them fired from their jobs, leaving death threats and harassing phone calls to both their targets and targets' families, etc. I haven't dug deep enough yet to know if Guggenheim stumbled into this or if he's fully aware of what he's doing, but using the same self-justifying language sexists use in attacking women isn't helping any sort of claim that he's not sexist.

[rutog98]

Looks like we have another X-Men Gold scandal! Apparently Guggenheim is a sexist bigot, and covered for others' misdemours. As Kitty would say, he's a jerk!

https://twitter.com/offtothegraces/s...28958355849216

Now I believe this is why he's writing down Storm so badly. She's both black and a female, so he's really gonna try and scale her back.