No. "She wouldn't have been raped if she would have worn something less revealing." Being drunk is no excuse to violate someone else's bodily autonomy. Anything other than "yes" is NO.
I actually agree. Many men consider drunk a way of overcoming a no. That view is wrong and has to change. We need to start having some form of common respect for each other. That way even if you happen to be in an altered stated you are more likely to act on instinct. If your instinct is to be calm and respectful then that has a better chance of happening. This is why I give George the benefit of the doubt. I find him to be a mindful person who choses his words and actions carefully. That does not mean he cannot screw up, but if he does he will asses the situation and learn from it. Other people who are more drama queens and rude like Kevin spacey should not be regarded in the same way.
He may have found that to be a mistake and was more careful in the future considering there is not a long line of people saying those things. Also if alcohol was involved you do stupid shit. He may have learned to be more careful of other people's feelings after that. From his perspective it had to suck also because he was obviously into the guy and when you get moving in that direction it is difficult, but necessary, to stop. Given he was probably a little bussed himself the story looks like just an uncomfortable encounter. Unless I missed it there was no retribution for the incident. It would be polite to apologise and maybe George will. I think he is a thoughtful man so that might come around at a proper time and place. We may not even see it. I am just saying in the case of George it seems to not be a terrible attack even though the other guy might feel confused and perhaps ashamed if he is not gay.
Good. Our culture's veneration of entertainment celebrities is overactive anyway. They all deserve to be knocked down to size in our minds.
"I wouldn't be surprised if history remembers this as the Sulu Manuver." So, when an allegation like this surfaces, does our willingness to believe it and end someone's career and/or leave their reputation in ruins come down simply to how much we like them?
Pretty much. People tried reporting Cosby for decades, but were unable to get anyone to believe him, simply because of how popular he was.
I resisted condemning Cosby for a long time, mainly because of how much he meant to me. But, though the nature of the crime makes it difficult to prove, (1) the sheer weight of consistent accusations against him, and (2) his own admission under oath that he plied women with drugs eventually forced my opinion to guilty. However, thinking he's guilty (as I do) is not the same as proving it beyond reasonable doubt in a courtroom.
I've been over George Takei for a while, but accusation is iffy as hell. Dude passed out for a second, and when he woke up George hadn't really accomplished anything and then stopped when asked? I thought roofies were more effective than that, and that rapists didn't take no for an answer.
Well sure, but I'd prefer it be due to our ability to critically think when considering our sources rather than it be due to someone's libido causing them to sexually assault another human being. Of course, I'm of the opinion we venerate too many who do not deserve it, like politicians, preachers, police officers, and yeah, celebrities. While I am disappointed in George (if true), there are people who are opportunists, who wouldn't normally make an attempt unless they thought they could get away with it. Upon realizing this man was now awake and alert, George could have quickly acquiesced because the opportunity had passed. Just a thought, of course. I could be way off. As for George himself, yeah, I kind of got over him some time back, mainly because he wouldn't stop about Shatner. Look, I get it, Shatner's a dick, but it has been 50+ years. Let. it. go.
I imagine we're going to see some backlash from #metoo as society comes to grips with gray areas. I know there's a primal need to identify which group you belong to ("he did it and he's evil/he didn't and he's a saint"), but I think some things we'll never know. This goes for Moore et al. as well. Just posting it here.
Bingo. /thread The bandwagon of accusations and media circus is going to backfire. If you've been sexually assaulted, you go to the police or you sue the perpetrator. This trend of running to the media is not helpful, and I fear we're becoming a society where no one is entitled to a fair trial when there are headlines to be made.
You left out the other part of my post, namely that even with evidence, perpetrators more often than not walk. That includes white women accusing black men. (See Also: Bill Cosby) in a world where out of 1000 reported cases only three end with any jail time, to include bullshit sentences like Polanski and Brock Turner received, because survivors get told don' bother because they were drunk/had reputations/wore too little clothing... This is the most effective avenue they've got until our system prioritizes sex crimes like they do vice crimes.
Oh, the media will not be responsible about this at all. Modern journalism rarely rises above gossip rag these days.
Whenever I want to decode something that seemingly doesn't make any moral sense, I have to think like Big Business, and to think like Big Business, I just imagine that I'm a giant human size mosquito that sees all life as a throbbing blood sack to feast on. Labor is dollars, dollars are blood for the mosquito, the cheaper the labor, the better the profits, and the ideal cheapest labor is slavery. And the Prison Industrial Complex is slavery. Who do you think makes better slaves? Jacked up, tatted, angry guys that pump iron? Or soft, fattened, entitled, sclerotic rich old perverts with baby soft hands? Nope, once you follow the crimes that make the big bucks for the Ownership Class, it's easy to sort out why petty little bullshit vice crimes are enforced with more gusto than rape. Puzzles are so much easier when you've got the picture on the box to work from. The picture is the mosquito. Always remember that.
All the media does is report it. Its the corporations that pull the plug on jobs because they don't want to be within 50 miles of anyone who has any negative baggage so their product does not get tarnished.
The media selects what it reports. More so, they choose the narrative that frames the whole story. Of course, that’s if they even bother to check if the information is factually correct in the first place. If you’re not certain of their priorities, just ask how often they recant on inaccuracies.
Even if true... 36 years! Fuck off, really. Those #metoo attention whores are a godsend to all the abusive assholes out there right now. Uhhhh I have been looked at 28 years ago on the subway! Big trauma! Metoo meeeeetooooo!!!!! Meanwhile, millions of women are being beaten and raped on a daily basis. But then who are they when Z-class celebrities can get a half second in the spotlight.
I agree to an extent. That is, the whole issue of sex crimes needs to be looked at and, in particular, how the justice system (from police to attorneys to courts to victims services) functions in this regard. It's clearly not working as it should when it comes to this issue. But I'm very concerned about "trial by media"... or, in the 21st century, "trial by social media". There is a disturbing trend where someone merely needs to make an accusation and the recipient of the accusation has their professional and social life destroyed. Because, you know, no one has EVER made a false accusation. The entire western justice system is predicated on the notion that a person is innocent until proven guilty. I fear we've tossed that principle aside in the search for sensational headlines and trendy hashtags.
I was a teenager. Everything outside the family was hot. Puke and a cold shower does tend to be a turn off.