Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Not saying I totally think it is as these cultures totally do exist and need shifting. But given that it seems realistic that there is an attack on democracy happening at the mo I was wondering if anyone thinks there are similarities.

Its a heck of a way to take a politician or outspoken celeb down!

I'm really glad the Weinstein thing broke, it will do a lot of good in the long term and there is plenty of strong emerging evidence of illegal behaviour.


But removing someone from a film when there is absolutely no evidence is just not part of a modern democratic system of justice. Career's and reputations totally ruined on no evidence of anything illegal and often years ago when there was a very different culture!


Is that ok? On that basis I think almost anyone could be taken down if they spoke out against the wrong people.


Also not condoning anything Spacey did or did not do!

The key point about McCarthyism was that almost everybody targeted was innocent of the key accusation i.e. that they were traitors. Most weren't Communist sympathisers at all, but even the cases involving those that were Communists did not show any evidence that they were working against the US.


My instinct (and it can only be that) is that the majority of the recent harassment allegations are sincere and are likely to contain a significant element of factual truth. However, that will capture an enormously wide scope of situations, from clumsy attempted flirting at one extreme all the way through to rape at the other extreme. In the short term the hope is that sensible debate remains possible, but even that may not be achievable - we live in immoderate times.

Am I right in thinking the film hasn't been released? If so hardly rewriting history on this point. More worrying to me is the rewriting of classic books (e.g. Noddy) to comply with modern norms rather than viewing them in historical context.


Anyway back on topic I think we need to keep a sense of perspective here. E.g., there's no need to strip Spacey of his many awards justly earned because of his sexual peccadilloes.

I just want to clarify something. Are you saying that groping people, harassing them and aggressively trying to seduce them are all "peccadilloes". Because that infers something individual but ultimately harmless, whereas Spacey (and many others) seem to have been far more predatory, and I'm not sure the two are the same.


I haven't seen any account of stripping Spacey of his awards, though I suspect his career is over. I share concerns of over-reaction in general, but in the specific cases that have so far come to light it looks to me much more that the chickens are coming home to roost on certain powerful and sexually predatory men who shouldn't have done it in the first place.

Agree with your point on peccadilloes JoeLeg. I'll wait to see if many of the alleged transgressions are proved. My essential point is we can't have trial by twitter - a sort of virtual mob.


Some of the allegations may be well-founded and the people in question punished appropriately. I'm not sure in these cases people should be stripped of awards gained during their careers. It's not the same as, say, stripping athletes of medals won unfairly by drug enhanced cheating and re-writing sporting records accordingly.

DaveR Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The key point about McCarthyism was that almost

> everybody targeted was innocent of the key

> accusation i.e. that they were traitors. Most

> weren't Communist sympathisers at all, but even

> the cases involving those that were Communists did

> not show any evidence that they were working

> against the US.

>

> My instinct (and it can only be that) is that the

> majority of the recent harassment allegations are

> sincere and are likely to contain a significant

> element of factual truth. However, that will

> capture an enormously wide scope of situations,

> from clumsy attempted flirting at one extreme all

> the way through to rape at the other extreme. In

> the short term the hope is that sensible debate

> remains possible, but even that may not be

> achievable - we live in immoderate times.



This and the cycling post - striking gold.


This and McCarthyism are very little alike. Sexual harassment of any kind is illegal in the workplace, and has been for a long time. It's sad how much has been unsaid for so long.

I think trial by Twitter or newspaper is unhelpful and damaging. There should be some clearer lines drawn, sexual assault is a crime which needs to be reported, some of the behaviour being discussed is an HR disciplinary matter, not criminal behaviour. But if it means organsations now look at their procedures that will be a positive thing ? much of this harassment went unreported at the time because people couldn't safely complain.

And if this encourages victims of assault to come forward, however long ago the assault took place, then that is a good thing as well.

McCarthyism is not the right term. But there is something worrying going on.


We seem have staggered wildly from dismissing allegations without investigation to treating everyone as guilty without investigation. The question now is whether the tragic suicide of Carl Sargeant will calm things down a bit, as it does seem he was treated very poorly and unfairly.


In other words, we need to get to a place where allegations are taken seriously and the accused are treated fairly.

There better be, otherwise people are going to feel that there is no chance for a fair hearing for the accused.


I broadly agree with Loz; new allegations are emerging all the time and while it's of vital importance that legitimate harrasment can be reported, challenged and dealt with, I worry there will be an automatic assumption that there is "no smoke without fire", a phrase I have often used thought is dangerous, and untrue.

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Ermmm ... I think there's more to come out on Carl Sargeant Loz


Quite possibly, but you say that like you already know he is guilty - and that is the exact danger I am referring to.


He may be guilty; he may not be. I certainly don't know. But don't you think it should have been fairly investigated before he was sacked? There is a massive, crucial difference between being "suspended subject to an investigation" and "sacked", as the latter implies guilt.


Plus it seems that they refused to tell him of what he was being accused. How is that fair?


As I said, it is completely right that something must change from where it was before. People should be confident that is they think they have been harassed or worse, they will be listened to and their allegations investigated.

JoeLeg Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> There better be, otherwise people are going to

> feel that there is no chance for a fair hearing

> for the accused.

>

> I broadly agree with Loz; new allegations are

> emerging all the time and while it's of vital

> importance that legitimate harrasment can be

> reported, challenged and dealt with, I worry there

> will be an automatic assumption that there is "no

> smoke without fire", a phrase I have often used

> thought is dangerous, and untrue.


Mass hallucination (or whatever you call it) does exist


Remember this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orkney_child_abuse_scandal

Mass hallucination - really? More true to say the dam of mass cover-up finally wore thin enough for decades of suppressed incidents to flood out!


Surely with increased awareness around mental illness in recent years we all realise how sexual abuse and exploitation can ruin people's lives. Trauma often makes itself felt a long time after the event.


I certainly remember plenty of inappropriate comments and touching, and strippers in the office for people's birthdays (in the morning!) in the late 80s, and pretty colleagues being sexually harrassed up to maybe early 00s (I well remember the married head of legal who tried to make one of his juniors agree to have children with him). It went on for decades after attitudes and company policies had superficially changed. Ml


My own concern is that it feels fundamentally misguided to judge what happened in the past from today's viewpoint. It should be seen in the legal and social context in which it is alleged to have taken place - unless it involves children or other vulnerable people, in which case fire away.

Houseoflego Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> But removing someone from a film when there is

> absolutely no evidence is just not part of a

> modern democratic system of justice. Career's and

> reputations totally ruined on no evidence of

> anything illegal and often years ago when there

> was a very different culture!

>

> Is that ok? On that basis I think almost anyone

> could be taken down if they spoke out against the

> wrong people.

>

> Also not condoning anything Spacey did or did not

> do!


Would you extend that to the removal of Saville's headstone?


And when was there ever a culture that saw sexual harassment/ assault and rape as acceptable? It was not more acceptable at the time any more than it is now. It is just that now, we don't turn a blind eye.

Robert Poste's Child Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Mass hallucination - really? More true to say the

> dam of mass cover-up finally wore thin enough for

> decades of suppressed incidents to flood out!

>

> Surely with increased awareness around mental

> illness in recent years we all realise how sexual

> abuse and exploitation can ruin people's lives.

> Trauma often makes itself felt a long time after

> the event.

>

> I certainly remember plenty of inappropriate

> comments and touching, and strippers in the office

> for people's birthdays (in the morning!) in the

> late 80s, and pretty colleagues being sexually

> harrassed up to maybe early 00s (I well remember

> the married head of legal who tried to make one of

> his juniors agree to have children with him). It

> went on for decades after attitudes and company

> policies had superficially changed. Ml

>

> My own concern is that it feels fundamentally

> misguided to judge what happened in the past from

> today's viewpoint. It should be seen in the legal

> and social context in which it is alleged to have

> taken place - unless it involves children or other

> vulnerable people, in which case fire away.


I certainly believe most if not all of these accusations are true - but you have to keep in mind the possibility (devils advocate type thing). All cases need to be investigated and the accuser and accused given their rights.


You're right about espoused values and real values in companies - they don't match even now. In the pub a lot of touching still goes on (in my experience) - one pub recently I felt it was human pinball :)


Some people generally just don't like being touched at all though and they have that right too wherever they are.

As someone who has been falsely accused of something previously - it's not fun. It can destroy you. In my case it was someone I didn't even know. Whom I'd met twice briefly for a few seconds and said a brief hello to. At first I thought it was a joke - then it dawns on you that it's real. When you are 100% innocent and a decent, respectful, upstanding human it's beyond awful. And you're confused. Why would someone do this? The answers aren't always rational:


- Money

- Angry at the world, men/women in general and just want to get someone

- History of mental illness or personality disorder


When you're innocent, whatever you do, you can't win. You can follow "the process" and air a load of stuff publicly which can destroy your reputation, you can pay out (which as we've seen can still destroy your reputation - if it comes out down the line it's seen as an admission of guilt) or...there isn't really another decent option. You're screwed.


In my case it just went away. But for those who had to be involved there's always a whiff. You're tarnished.


I also suspect a number of the allegations are true, and welcome the sea change this should bring. But don't forget that amongst all this will be a significant % of innocent people who for whatever reason get targeted by opportunists looking for cash or just to settle some score in their head.

DovertheRoad Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> As someone who has been falsely accused of

> something previously - it's not fun. It can

> destroy you.


That's awful - and coming from Wales I know the culture their means someone like Carl Sargeant (whatever the truth of the matter) would have felt totally destroyed and unable to start again (it's a real goldfish bowl)

He has apologised for quote 'deeply inappropriate behaviour' and he's 'seeking evaluation and treatment'. Doesn't look like a denial to me, and sheer number of stories must be enough to worry the producers about box office. Editing people in and out of films isn't uncommon given CGI and the use of body doubles and stunt people.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Hi all, Im a Southwark council leaseholder and live downstairs in a ground floor flat, there is one flat above me, it's a house with individual front doors leading from the street into the shared pathway. My neighbour told me he has had a ring doorbell installed, no discussion as to how I would feel being on camera everytime I go in and out or in my front garden. I was told it's only for deliveries and doesn't record and only activates when pressed, however I don't know this and I feel really uncomfortable everytime I'm out in garden or on doorstep talking to people. Everytime I walk in/out, it lights up and in the eve it has a  infra red  light. Now I've read up that as he said its only for deliveries, he could set it so it only activates when pressed, however it activates with its motion sensor. Had he said to me about getting it installed, I could have had the opportunity to ask about it recording etc but nothing except it's being installed and when I arrived home it was there. I don't like being horrible to people however I feel I have not been considered in his decision and I feel very uncomfortable as, some times I have to stand on doorstep to get signal for my mobile and I really don't like the idea of being watched and listened to. Has anyone got any advice as I'm beginning to get angry as I've asked about it once and was told it only activates when pressed. I believe this is not true. I know southwark council say you need to ask permission to make sure the neighbours are OK with it, I don't really want to go down that road but I don't know how to approach the subject again. They also put a shed approx 3 foot from my back room window, these places are built so my window faces their rear garden and there upstairs window  faces mine. They said it's there temporarily, that was over a year ago and it does affect the light, plus I'm hoping to sell up soon and the view from window is mainly a dark brown shed. When I've mentioned this, I was told they have no where else to put it, whereas originally they said its only temporary, Also the floorboards above are bare and I get woke early morning and at night, the thudding is so bad my light shakes and window rattles, so I mentioned this and asked if they have rugs, I was told when they get the boards re sanded they will get rugs, I should have asked if they could get rugs and just take them up when boards being done, which I would have done had it been me living above someone, their attitude was I can just put up with it until they are ready. so they had the floor boards done, and the workmen was hammering screws, yes screws, in the floorboards, I spoke to workmen to ask how much longer and they said yes, are using screws to make less noise! I could hear the cordless screwdriver, not an issue but for every screw there were at least 8 whacks, the owners had gone out to avoid the noise  so I  spoke to workmen as the noise was unbearable, the sanding, not an issue at all, people need to get things done to their home and I'm fine that on occasions there will be temporary noise. now I have a nice crack on my bedroom ceiling, I mentioned this to owner but no response, he said there were alot of loose floorboards and it will be much better now, not so noisy, as though I don't know the difference between squeaking floor boards and thudding, and nothing was mentioned re the crack or that they now have rugs, which if it were me, I'd be trying to resolve the issue so we can get on with feeling happy in our homes. so I'm feeling it's a total lack of consideration. these places are old and Edwardian and I've lived here over 40 years, had 4 different neighbours and it's only now the noise of thudding is really bad and the people before had floorboards but nothing like this. As you can probably tell I'm really wound up and I don't want to end up exploding at them, I've always got on with neighbours and always said if there's a problem with my dog, pls let me know, always tell me, however I feel it's got to the point where I say something and I'm fobbed off. I know I should tell them but I'm angry, perhaps I should write them a letter. Any suggestions greatly appreciated and thank you for reading my rant. 
    • Sadly, the price we now all pay for becoming a soft apologetic society.
    • Exactly the same thing happened to me a few years back; they were after my Brompton. Luckily there were only 3 of them so I managed to get away and got a woman to call the police, then they backed off, but not after having hit me in the back of the head first. Police said next time just give them what they want, but I sure as hell wasn't just going to hand over my bike to them!
    • In case anyone is renovating or stripping out an old kitchen, I am looking for a base kitchen unit or carcass to house an oven for a temporary set up kitchen.   Also looking for a run of worktop at least 180 cm long if anyone is disposing of something like this, I would be happy to collect.   thanks   Mila
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...