Right.
I mean, I'm OK with holding people accountable, if they have good intentions but fuck up their wording or come across as tone-deaf, they are not exempt from criticism. But right now we need all the allies we can get and there was nothing really objectionable in his post.
Right.
That said, if Harvey Weinstein had been a small man, perhaps he would have indeed more easily refused, but somehow I doubt it would have made such a huge difference. He was frightening mostly because of his power, rather than just his size alone.
Lmao No!.
Dude comes across as fake
and has been around the block many, many times with women.
Please note, this is only in reference to comments like those from Momoa and Hayter:
Humans aren't perfect guys. You can't hang on their every word. Let someone talk long enough and they'll probably say something eventually that someone out there could take offense to. I'm willing to wager every single person in this topic is guilty of it at some point in their life, some more frequently than others. Because it's human fucking nature.
Nothing Momoa or Hayter said paint them as bad people. You can't (or at least shouldn't) be willing to burn someone at the stake over whatever small comment you view as insensitive, especially when it's not the point of their overall message or it's out of context.
Hayter made a very good statement and told his own story. That's another good thing to have out in the world, hanging on one sentence of it because it is possibly insensitive to some people is missing the entire point.
In Momoa's case the joke wasn't great but it's all about context and reading the room. People in that room did laugh at it. Because his character on the show, which the panel was for, was literally a rapist barbarian. Typically that kind of thing would never fly. And yeah, rape should never be trivialized. But his character literally rapes another right at the start of that show. And everyone in that room knew that, because they were fans of the show. He's poking fun at that. That doesn't make him a bad person, in fact due to the context it doesn't even make it inappropriate. If you want to take real issue with it you have to take issue with the show for depicting it in the first place. Then you're down the rabbit hole of well, it was adapted from a book... so it shouldn't have been written in the first place. Then... can we not have fiction where rape occurs? It's such a stupid slippery slope.
People aren't perfect. This witch hunting is so stupid. It's also completely separate from what the topic is actually about: Ben Affleck groping someone.
Jeez, people complaining about a heartfelt disclosure from Hayter? Fucking kidding me yo.
Men everywhere do this. Everywhere.
Colin Farrell is a creepy raper guy because he's a womanizer
I think youre interpreting all of that completely wrong. Hes explaining why he doesnt feel his experience is necessarily equivalent given the fact he wasnt afraid for his safety.
Good to see him come out with this too, though I'm sorry he had to go through that. I don't think he said anything bad there. He pointed out his stances on all aspects of this issue. He gave his sympathy and support for the abused, gave his assurance that his productions won't have anything of the sort, acknowledged that his own harassment situation was different, and recognized that though he could have physically done something about it, most women cannot. It's not too different from what Terry Crews said. I'm not sure if it's a "humorous" story to tell, though. It's horrifying.
It's not "a little weird;" he talks like a normal person, not like a press release.The "I'm just not gay", as if being gay would have justified that abuse of power, is a little weird.
🤔http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1407643&highlight=
Reminder I made this thread a couple months ago about Ben Affleck and got banned a month for concern trolling because I had previous bans, even though my views completely changed and I was a teenager when I started browsing GAF.
So now it's a consensus on GAF it's sexual assault eh?
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1407643&highlight=
Reminder I made this thread a couple months ago about Ben Affleck and got banned a month for concern trolling because I had previous bans, even though my views completely changed and I was a teenager when I started browsing GAF.
So now it's a consensus on GAF it's sexual assault eh?
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1407643&highlight=
Reminder I made this thread a couple months ago about Ben Affleck and got banned a month for concern trolling because I had previous bans, even though my views completely changed and I was a teenager when I started browsing GAF.
So now it's a consensus on GAF it's sexual assault eh?
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1407643&highlight=
Reminder I made this thread a couple months ago about Ben Affleck and got banned a month for concern trolling because I had previous bans, even though my views completely changed and I was a teenager when I started browsing GAF.
So now it's a consensus on GAF it's sexual assault eh?
I think the bigger point is fearing for your safety adds an aspect of trauma he didnt experience there. And in the case of a full on sexual assault or rape he doesn't have any experience being physically overpowered and sexually abused like some of these women have been.
The feeling of giving up because you know you cant stop them from doing what they want to do is something he never experienced and I think makes a significant enough difference that he felt it was important to highlight and point out.
GAF is full of hypocrites, I just wanted anyone reading this thread to read that one.
Just like Ben Afflect they just pretend to behind women but really they're astounding hypocrites.
GAF is full of hypocrites, I just wanted anyone reading this thread to read that one.
Just like Ben Afflect they just pretend to behind women but really they're astounding hypocrites.
The assumption that no one here has ever watched Game of Thrones and therefore doesn't get the context with which Momoa made the joke is stupid. As is calling the joke fine because "people that were present laughed". That's why it's called rape culture. It isn't a one man thing.
I don't think Momoa is a bad guy, but the joke was bad and inappropriate. Period.
GAF is full of hypocrites, I just wanted anyone reading this thread to read that one.
Just like Ben Afflect they just pretend to behind women but really they're astounding hypocrites.
GAF is full of hypocrites, I just wanted anyone reading this thread to read that one.
Just like Ben Afflect they just pretend to behind women but really they're astounding hypocrites.
GAF is full of hypocrites, I just wanted anyone reading this thread to read that one.
Just like Ben Afflect they just pretend to behind women but really they're astounding hypocrites.
GAF is full of hypocrites, I just wanted anyone reading this thread to read that one.
Just like Ben Afflect they just pretend to behind women but really they're astounding hypocrites.
GAF is full of hypocrites, I just wanted anyone reading this thread to read that one.
Just like Ben Afflect they just pretend to behind women but really they're astounding hypocrites.
GAF is full of hypocrites, I just wanted anyone reading this thread to read that one.
Just like Ben Afflect they just pretend to behind women but really they're astounding hypocrites.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1407643&highlight=
Reminder I made this thread a couple months ago about Ben Affleck and got banned a month for concern trolling because I had previous bans, even though my views completely changed and I was a teenager when I started browsing GAF.
So now it's a consensus on GAF it's sexual assault eh?
GAF is full of hypocrites, I just wanted anyone reading this thread to read that one.
Just like Ben Afflect they just pretend to behind women but really they're astounding hypocrites.
Thanks, I hadn't seen this before.
I apologise to everyone, please dont' ban me again I'm so sorry everyone.
lol I can't wait for his next tweet.
The anecdote contributes a lot, actually.I'm not quite sure what to make of the Hayter anecdote.
One guy made a move on another guy and the second he said no, it was all over.
So, Hayter is saying if he was smaller or didn't have martial arts training, he might not have felt comfortable saying no. But why is that the "fault" of the producer? Is the producer not allowed to make a move on someone in the event they haven't had combat training?
I understand the inherent power dynamic at play but again, that's not the fault of the producer and shouldn't necessarily preclude him from making a sexual advance, on the proviso that he respects that advance being rebuffed which it was in this case.
The context explains what he means. He says he totally doesn't fault/judge people who do use their sex appeal to get ahead if that's what they really want, so to me this implies he might have been tempted to do that, but since he's not gay, it couldn't ever happen.
At least, I think that's what he meant... Not that "if the abuser had been attractive to these women it wouldn't be so bad". Or I hope so, anyway...
Thanks, I hadn't seen this before.
I apologise to everyone, please dont' ban me again I'm so sorry everyone.
Thanks, I hadn't seen this before.
I apologise to everyone, please dont' ban me again I'm so sorry everyone.
I'm not quite sure what to make of the Hayter anecdote.
One guy made a move on another guy and the second he said no, it was all over.
So, Hayter is saying if he was smaller or didn't have martial arts training, he might not have felt comfortable saying no. But why is that the "fault" of the producer? Is the producer not allowed to make a move on someone in the event they haven't had combat training?
I understand the inherent power dynamic at play but again, that's not the fault of the producer and shouldn't necessarily preclude him from making a sexual advance, on the proviso that he respects that advance being rebuffed which it was in this case.
that's not the fault of the producer and shouldn't necessarily preclude him from making a sexual advance
I will try harder in the future to not be dismissive and thanks for being patient and explaining. I tend to lose double-down when I get into internet arguments without thinking much and it's clearly wrong.Look my dude. Not only should you have read the thread before posting the link to your previous thread and calling us hypocrite, but people in that previous thread of yours told you that the interview was staged and Ben and AML were friends. And your thread got locked.
Back then, you should have taken this as a sign that you needed to do some research because you might have been off base. It shouldn't have led up to this moment.
Anyways. It's not that big of a deal; it's just annoying because you were literally ignoring everyone, which meant you were posting in bad faith. Don't do that anymore.
Men everywhere?
Da fuq.
Funny enough, no one likes to point out that these kinds of rampages specifically cheapen actual assault accusations and are a major contributor to the culture of silence around sexual assault. The "I need my clicks so generate outrage" culture that has infested Social Justice is protected heavily because of tribalism and "my side can do no wrong" bullshit, when it's a huge problem when dealing with the code of silence around assault and how to help victims.
I'm not quite sure what to make of the Hayter anecdote.
One guy made a move on another guy and the second he said no, it was all over.
So, Hayter is saying if he was smaller or didn't have martial arts training, he might not have felt comfortable saying no. But why is that the "fault" of the producer? Is the producer not allowed to make a move on someone in the event they haven't had combat training?
I understand the inherent power dynamic at play but again, that's not the fault of the producer and shouldn't necessarily preclude him from making a sexual advance, on the proviso that he respects that advance being rebuffed which it was in this case.
It's not "a little weird;" he talks like a normal person, not like a press release.
He didn't say anything close to it would be justified if he were gay. Finding something to be offended by in Hayter's post seems ridiculous to me.
Please read the thread before posting hot takes.
I can recognize myself in this. As Hayter.Hayter is trying so hard providing a ton of context to prevent anyone from taking offense, and so of course someone takes offense not necessarily to the context provided but the amount of context. Because of course they did.