The All-Purpose, Hollywood Sexual Accusation Thread

[TheInvisibleMan]

Seriously...

Never mind the hypothetical business you own. We are talking about companies that largely make money off of the general public supporting what they do. If it looks like you do not care about half of that general public, you might be making a lot less money in the near future.

Those companies are going to act accordingly.

and people are getting fired

why do you think most companies (large ones at that) have a ZERO TOLERANCE policy when it comes to things like harassment?

[numberthirty]

There's perhaps some people who are a little dogmatic in their point of view, but I don't think there's an actual push to remove due process. There's no political party or organized activists that people that seriously that are saying due process in the case of sexual harassment shouldn't apply.

Here's the entire issue with looking at this in terms of "Due Process"...

That's almost always out the window when you have a contract with an "Ethics" clause in it. It's there strictly so they can fire you for anything in that ballpark, and you signed a contract that agreed to that condition of employment.

[numberthirty]

and people are getting fired

why do you think most companies (large ones at that) have a ZERO TOLERANCE policy when it comes to things like harassment?

That's a non-issue in a lot of what this thread revolves around. We are essentially talking about two different situations.

[ed2962]

Here's the entire issue with looking at this in terms of "Due Process"...

That's almost always out the window when you have a contract with an "Ethics" clause in it. It's there strictly so they can fire you for anything in that ballpark, and you signed a contract that agreed to that condition of employment.

Oh, I get that. My thing is I'm just not convinced of this idea that there's a movement of people out there trying to get men convicted /reputations trashed on the word of some random females alone and there's nothing men can do but quake in fear.


I work in an office where women outnumber men and while I've tried to keep thing workplace appropriate with them, I'm certainly not worried that because of #Metoo that one lady is going to falsely accuse me because I didn't bring back the stapler. I'm not worried that some woman I spent a drunk night with is going to try and get even with me cuz we had a bad break-up. Or that the woman I had an affair with at my first 9-5 job 20 yrs ago is going to find me and bring up embarrassing facts about me.

[ed2962]

This is almost like the so-called Ferguson Effect where supposedly cops are afraid to do their jobs cuz they might get filmed and crime is now out of control.

[rogersmcfeely]

Oh, I get that. My thing is I'm just not convinced of this idea that there's a movement of people out there trying to get men convicted /reputations trashed on the word of some random females alone and there's nothing men can do but quake in fear.

There's no organized movement or grand conspiracy or anything like that. Just occasional individuals exploiting situations for personal reasons.

[ed2962]

There's no organized movement or grand conspiracy or anything like that. Just occasional individuals exploiting situations for personal reasons.

Sure. But that has happened since from the begining of history no matter what the cause.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

Sure. But that has happened since from the begining of history no matter what the cause.

The problem is there's a certain group of people that want to deny that it happens or pretend that it's so statistically insignificant that we still should just assume guilt upon accusation. There's a lower threshold here that isn't applied to virtually any other crime. Like yes we've convicted people like OJ Simpson and Casey Anthony of murder, but there was a lot there to back it up. More than a mere accusation at least.

To me it just raises a massive eyebrow that some people feel the need for a complete no holds barred accusation equals guilt policy. It's one thing to listen to an accuser and take them seriously and form your own opinion afterwards. It's another to just say "I'm going to believe this no matter what, because I feel like that how it should be happened". It's just one of those intellectually dishonest things that people do to prove some sort of moral point. It's like no you can be an adult and look at a situation and make up your own mind about it and decide whether you think it's credible. Every crime has lots of false or incorrect accusations, it's disingenuous to pretend this crime is exempt.

It's obviously going to come down to your experiences. If you know someone whose been accused of something and it was later proven false, you realize how easy it for someone to just say something incredibly damaging about someone else because they thought it was in their own interests. Good people can act pretty shitty sometimes.

Like I don't doubt the Me Too movement or the need to examine a serious problem. But to be honest, right now instead of having a serious nuanced discussion, people just want what's most comfortable and what's most comfortable is highly one sided and idealized view that it's all black and white and nobody might have interests that might be less than immaculate.

[rogersmcfeely]

Like yes we've convicted people like OJ Simpson and Casey Anthony of murder, but there was a lot there to back it up.

OJ didn't get sent up for murder. He finally got busted for armed robbery.

[hulahulk]

Casey Anthony wasn't convicted, either.

[ed2962]

The problem is there's a certain group of people that want to deny that it happens or pretend that it's so statistically insignificant that we still should just assume guilt upon accusation. There's a lower threshold here that isn't applied to virtually any other crime. Like yes we've convicted people like OJ Simpson and Casey Anthony of murder, but there was a lot there to back it up. More than a mere accusation at least.

To me it just raises a massive eyebrow that some people feel the need for a complete no holds barred accusation equals guilt policy. It's one thing to listen to an accuser and take them seriously and form your own opinion afterwards. It's another to just say "I'm going to believe this no matter what, because I feel like that how it should be happened". It's just one of those intellectually dishonest things that people do to prove some sort of moral point. It's like no you can be an adult and look at a situation and make up your own mind about it and decide whether you think it's credible. Every crime has lots of false or incorrect accusations, it's disingenuous to pretend this crime is exempt.

It's obviously going to come down to your experiences. If you know someone whose been accused of something and it was later proven false, you realize how easy it for someone to just say something incredibly damaging about someone else because they thought it was in their own interests. Good people can act pretty shitty sometimes.

Like I don't doubt the Me Too movement or the need to examine a serious problem. But to be honest, right now instead of having a serious nuanced discussion, people just want what's most comfortable and what's most comfortable is highly one sided and idealized view that it's all black and white and nobody might have interests that might be less than immaculate.

I don't know that anyone reasonable is claiming that false accusations never happen. But to your larger point, I understand where you're coming from, but a lot of what your talking about comes down to human nature. If the discussion were about abortion, there's people who passionately believe that it's murder in any situation. If we were talking needle exchanges there's folks who have a position and they won't budge...same if we were talking about gay marriage. I agree that there are some people who might be hysterical when it comes to expressing their position but that shouldn't take away from the actual topic nor is it proof that there's actual steps being taken to give hysterical people what they want (if that makes any sense).

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

Casey Anthony wasn't convicted, either.

OJ didn't get sent up for murder. He finally got busted for armed robbery.

You guys missed the point. My point was there have been instances where we as a public convicted someone of murder outside of a court of law, but in those cases there was a lot more there than a mere allegation. This is the only crime where simply saying something happened is enough to convict someone in the court of public opinion.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

I don't know that anyone reasonable is claiming that false accusations never happen. But to your larger point, I understand where you're coming from, but a lot of what your talking about comes down to human nature. If the discussion were about abortion, there's people who passionately believe that it's murder in any situation. If we were talking needle exchanges there's folks who have a position and they won't budge...same if we were talking about gay marriage. I agree that there are some people who might be hysterical when it comes to expressing their position but that shouldn't take away from the actual topic nor is it proof that there's actual steps being taken to give hysterical people what they want (if that makes any sense).

I understand what you're saying. I still think when the default mode is "believe an allegation no matter what and treat them all the same or you are bad guy who perpetuates this bad culture and we can label you as an apologist or anti feminist" the problem lies with person who feels need to get to that point. The only thing I've ever really advocated in this thread is: listen to victims and take them seriously, also review the facts and make up your own mind based off how you see the facts, and handle appropriately and don't rush to judgment. The fact that certain people see handling things with nuance as some kind of threat to their world view, is scary. That's what the other side does. All or nothing is never right. And the fact you have people in this thread dismissing the catastrophic effects an allegation can have is quite frankly irresponsible. I don't even want to get into the statistics of the whole thing and how skewed that can be. I'm just saying their's an effort that hasn't got unnoticed to take a blunt approach that can leave a lot of people harmed in it's wake and then another effort on top of it to dismiss that.

There's a reason we have that saying "better to let 10 guilty men walk free than convict an innocent one". When there are acceptable causalities whether in the court of public opinion or the real courts, you lose the more high ground. It becomes ideology and not a quest for justice.

[ed2962]

I understand what you're saying. I still think when the default mode is "believe an allegation no matter what and treat them all the same or you are bad guy who perpetuates this bad culture and we can label you as an apologist or anti feminist" the problem lies with person who feels need to get to that point. The only thing I've ever really advocated in this thread is: listen to victims and take them seriously, also review the facts and make up your own mind based off how you see the facts, and handle appropriately and don't rush to judgment. The fact that certain people see handling things with nuance as some kind of threat to their world view, is scary. That's what the other side does. All or nothing is never right. And the fact you have people in this thread dismissing the catastrophic effects an allegation can have is quite frankly irresponsible. I don't even want to get into the statistics of the whole thing and how skewed that can be. I'm just saying their's an effort that hasn't got unnoticed to take a blunt approach that can leave a lot of people harmed in it's wake and then another effort on top of it to dismiss that.

There's a reason we have that saying "better to let 10 guilty men walk free than convict an innocent one". When there are acceptable causalities whether in the court of public opinion or the real courts, you lose the more high ground. It becomes ideology and not a quest for justice.

My understanding is that statistics of false allegations is pretty low like under 10%. There's not some massive trend of innocent men being randomly charged. Of course, if you happen to be part of that 10%, this won't be any comfort. On the other hand if you where a women (or man) who was victimized and nothing was done, you aren't comforted either.

I guess part of my thing is that while "believe the accuser" is the default for some people, I don't think it's the default for society at large. It's probably the opposite. Look at some of the reactions in this very thread...a number of people are like, "Well, I dunno..."

This might not be the best example, but regarding the the Robert Porter situation, there's actual photos of his first ex-wive battered yet the president felt the need to tweet about "men's lives being ruined" and "what happened to due process?" There's physical evidence that the FBI found months ago of the guy's abuse, but even still the pres was slow to accept the facts.

[Cyke]

Man, here's a heart-breaking interview of Brendan Fraser. He recounts how he was also violated by the powerful Philip Berk of the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, and how it just compounded this avalanche of doubts and misfortunes that derailed his career.

https://www.gq.com/story/what-ever-h...social_twitter

He was in a hotel room just weeks ago, watching the Globes on TV, Fraser says, as the actresses wore black and the actors wore Time's Up pins in solidarity, when the broadcast showed Berk in the room. He was there and Fraser was not.

“Am I still frightened? Absolutely. Do I feel like I need to say something? Absolutely. Have I wanted to many, many times? Absolutely. Have I stopped myself? Absolutely.”

On the phone, he breathes deeply. “And maybe I am over-reacting in terms of what the instance was. I just know what my truth is. And it's what I just spoke to you.”