I'm sure all those girls knew exactly what they were doing. They were willing to trade sex in order to make it big in hollywood. It was a trade and both parties agreed to it.
I tend to agree with you, for the most part, regarding Harvey Weinstein. I am not sure if they
all knew what they were doing, but I'm reasonably sure that the vast majority certainly did. Hollywood has traded time on the "casting couch" for a quicker route to fame, probably ever since Hollywood was a thing. It doesn't make it right, from a fairness perspective. But if two adults consent to a quid pro quo, that's on them. One party coming out later and making it sound like an attack is not only incredible (as in "not credible"), but it is also a slap in the face to people that have been legitimately victimized, all too often brutally.
I'm a very firm believer in seeing the accused (not just H.W.) get a fair trial for rape claims and not a trial-by-media, because I'm old enough to remember the Tawana Brawley case as it happened, and I've seen other false rape accusations made against men since then. OP, you might have a point about the women knowing what they were doing--Hollywood seems to be a very corrupt place--but somehow I get the feeling that Harvey Weinstein is not completely innocent. But I don't know for sure; nor do most other people, and that's why he needs a trial with evidence presented. It's not like women haven't used sex to gain advantage/jobs/favors from powerful men before, and prostitution itself is the "oldest known profession".
Whatever the case may be, I think the media is getting ridiculous with these "he touched my breast 30 years ago, and now I'm going to ruin his life" stories. That's not quite the same as the HW case, but it's related and it's not a trend I'm fond of. Men shouldn't be pigs, but there's a big difference between flirting (even persistently), small sexual harassment, big sexual harassment, and outright rape. It seems like every offense is moving toward the "rape" category, and that's insane to me.
The media has decided to use the "sexual predator" to take down people. After all, who would support a true sexual predator? Seems like sometimes the people being taken down are for political reasons. In other cases, it seems like they're throwing a sacrificial lamb to the public and keeping other people's sexual indiscretions quiet. Essentially being the gatekeepers we know they're so adept at being. Especially here, on the Bitcoin Forum, the concept of gatekeepers and the need (and now, the technology) to bypass them should be crystal clear.
The thing is, repeatedly pulling the "XYZ is a predator" card when it's not warranted will cause people to be desensitized to the accusation. Our adrenal glands will literally stop being excited due to exhaustion. People will begin to ask the questions that some are now. The fact is, there is a huge difference between being a "victim" of someone that flirted a little too hard, or maybe even having someone touch you inappropriately, and being brutally raped. So people asking questions now, seeing that not everyone should be lumped into the latter category, is a good thing to bring this cycle of insanity back to a healthy place.
Best regards,
Ben
