Predator and Prey: Assault, harassment, and other aggressions in the entertainment industry

[Notabug]

12 hours ago, Zella said:

That was Jim DeRogatis's take on R. Kelly. He's the Chicago music reporter who really pushed for a reckoning to happen with R. Kelly (and wrote a really good book about R. Kelly's crimes). And his take was basically that he could never listen to R. Kelly music again, not just because he was so enmeshed in the case, but also because R. Kelly's music was so enmeshed in his crimes. That makes a lot of sense to me.

I think for me, newer and unseen/unexperienced efforts from disgraced celebrities tend to be more ruined by than older ones that I already like, especially if they're disconnected from their crimes. I am not sure that makes any sense on a logical level. But for example, I'll never watch another new Roman Polanski movie and don't actively seek out his work (or Adrien Brody's for that matter), but I can't deny how much of an effect that The Pianist had me on when I first watched it as a teenager. Way more so than Schindler's List actually. I rewatched it for the first time in years a few months ago, and it still had that effect on me. I know it incorporates some of Polanski's own experiences as a child Holocaust survivor, so his being the director is pretty integral to the final product, but it's also remarkably close to the source text and I think it stands alone on the strength of its own merits as biopic of Władysław Szpilman. 

With Michael Jackson, it's a little easier for me to listen to the Jackson 5 stuff from when he was just a kid, before he became a predator.  Then, again, I just love old Motown, so there's that, too.  I listen to his music and enjoy it on the radio, but would never purchase one of his CD's done as an adult, even though he is gone and won't benefit from it.  

However, the royalties from his music probably go to his kids who perhaps could use some therapy and I wouldn't feel bad contributing to that.

I loved old Woody Allen films, Annie Hall was one of my all time favorites.  I'll never watch it or any other film of his again and I am fine with that.

I loved The Pianist when it first came out but remember being disgusted when Polanski won the Oscar for it and got a standing ovation.  I won't watch the film again, no desire.

Weinstein is trickier if only because he produced so dam* many movies, its hard to remember them all.  I haven't attempted to watch any films he produced, but, if I saw his name in the credits, I think I'd turn it off.

Edited June 7, 2022 by Notabug

[bluegirl147]

1 minute ago, Notabug said:

I have mad respect for Ed Harris, Amy Madigan and Nick Nolte who were attending and pointedly refused to stand and applaud him.

I never knew that.  Makes me want to watch all their movies just because.  

2 minutes ago, Notabug said:

Weinstein is trickier if only because he produced so dam* many movies, its hard to remember them all.  I haven't attempted to watch any films he produced, but, if I saw his name in the credits, I think I'd turn it off.

Scott Rudin is another producer who is now problematic. And his name is on so many projects.  

[Notabug]

Sorry for the misstatement.  I thought Harris, Madigan and Nolte had protested Polanski, but they were not at that ceremony.  They did refuse to stand and applaud for Elia Kazan who won a lifetime achievement Oscar because he participating in the blacklisting of actors during the anti Communist witch hunts.

In 2020, Polanski won a French film award as best director and received very little applause and multiple people walked out in protest, so there's that. Unfortunately, they're all French film stars, so its unlikely any of us know them.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/28/movies/roman-polanski-cesar-awards-france.html

I used to like Johnny Depp back in the day, starting with 21 Jump Street, really liked What's Eating Gilbert Grape.  However, I soured on his over-the-top BS acting a long while back and don't care if he makes another movie.  The Amber Heard abuse just sealed the deal for me.

No interest in seeing another Mel Gibson flick.

I did see Top Gun and do like TC as an action star, but abhor his beliefs, so I am inconsistent, like everyone else.

Loved the Harry Potter books, read them multiple times and already own all of them.  Saddened by JK Rowling's hatred of the trans community, but would probably watch the films (again, some more) if they were on TV and will go to Universal Studios and enjoy the whole HP milieu because I am a hypocrite.

Edited June 7, 2022 by Notabug

[bluegirl147]

57 minutes ago, Notabug said:

No interest in seeing another Mel Gibson flick.

I avoided his movies for  years and then he popped up in Daddy's Home 2 (shoot me I liked the the first one and decided to check out the sequel) and thought well fuck.  I thought well in for a penny in for a pound and I re watched Lethal Weapon which I hadn't watched in years because I was boycotting Gibson.  But now I'm back on the wagon and abstaining from Gibson movies.  

1 hour ago, Notabug said:

I did see Top Gun and do like TC as an action star, but abhor his beliefs, so I am inconsistent, like everyone else.

Tom Cruise is tough for me.  He is in some movies I absolutely love and I do watch them but I don't feel like I'm doing something wrong by watching them.  Whereas if I watched a Woody Allen movie I would feel like I needed to ask someone for forgiveness.  

[RealHousewife]

Thank you for all the feedback everyone. I don't know why so many talented people are so sick. 

Unless I've missed some major news, Tom Cruise doesn't bother me even if we have different beliefs and/or he's an ass. For me, if everyone you watch/listen to has to be an angel, you'll just be left with Dolly Parton. Much as I love her, I need more. 

Edited June 7, 2022 by RealHousewife

[bluegirl147]

35 minutes ago, RealHousewife said:

For me, if everyone you watch/listen to has to be an angel, you'll just be left with Dolly Parton

Yeah now that Betty White is gone we only have Dolly.

For me to be done with someone they have to do something that is inexcusable for me.  My standard may not be the same as someone else's.  Anything to do with hurting children is at the top of my list.  Sexual misconduct is also at the top of the list.  Bigotry/Racism is always a big no for me.  And from there it could be someone who has such radically different beliefs from me to someone who is just an obnoxious asshole. Sometimes those two things overlap.  

[Jaded]

Stoney Westmoreland, Disney 'Andi Mack' actor, pleads guilty to child sex charge

[aradia22]

I will probably work myself up to watch Rosemary's Baby one day for Mia Farrow and Ruth Gordon. I'd consider Repulsion and Chinatown since they come up a lot in film criticism conversation but from what I know of both films, it might be too much misogyny for me. The only Polanski film I watched was Ghost Writer. I watched it on a plane and it was such goddamned bullshit I thought everyone must have been crazy for thinking he was a good director.

I think with Harry Potter, it helped that I loved the books but I wasn't a superfan (I couldn't remember a lot of trivia if you asked me even at the time) and I started to dislike the movies after movie 4. It's only become easier to detach naturally growing up and aging out of the target demographic. (Though who knows who they think the target audience is for those Fantastic Beasts movies.)

[aradia22]

I don't really get Tom Cruise if only because Elisabeth Moss and others are also Scientologists.

Quote

For me, if everyone you watch/listen to has to be an angel, you'll just be left with Dolly Parton. Much as I love her, I need more. 

No one is perfect. Not even Dolly. But most people are probably decent enough. Off the top of my head, Aubrey Plaza, Viola Davis, Sara Bareilles, Betty Who, etc. are talented and seem unproblematic. I don't expect celebrities to intelligently speak to every social issue or even champion causes. If they do their jobs and don't actively cause harm, that's enough. And clearing out the predators makes more room for everyone previously denied opportunities who will hopefully, mostly be different.

[Guest]

9 hours ago, RealHousewife said:

Unless I've missed some major news, Tom Cruise doesn't bother me even if we have different beliefs and/or he's an ass.

For me it’s not the weird beliefs or being an ass. It’s the fact that he is in a position of significant power in an organization that assaults and harasses people, protects rapists (Danny Masterson) and is suspected of murder. Plus if your wife has to plan a divorce like a military operation you’ve probably crossed a lot of lines. To me, Cruise is pretty much on par with Allison Mack in that he joined as an adult and is to high ranking to not know the truth.

7 hours ago, aradia22 said:

I don't really get Tom Cruise if only because Elisabeth Moss and others are also Scientologists.

I have an issue with most of them but less so with ones like Moss, who were raised in the cult, as long as they haven’t done anything bad individually. 

[RealHousewife]

49 minutes ago, aradia22 said:

No one is perfect. Not even Dolly. But most people are probably decent enough. Off the top of my head, Aubrey Plaza, Viola Davis, Sara Bareilles, Betty Who, etc. are talented and seem unproblematic. I don't expect celebrities to intelligently speak to every social issue or even champion causes. If they do their jobs and don't actively cause harm, that's enough. And clearing out the predators makes more room for everyone previously denied opportunities who will hopefully, mostly be different.

You're right, that was a hyperbolic statement. :) I know she's only human, but all these decades not one bitchy diva moment. That's impressive for a star of her caliber. My only criticism of Dolly is the constant boob jokes she does in interviews get old. Funny you mention Sara Bareilles, her music is very feel good like Dolly's. But despite the fact there are good talented people out there, the number of ones who are bad people is still nuts. I grew up being a huge Backstreet fan, and one of them has been accused of not just physical abuse but also rape. That's another situation where if you listen, are you supporting him? Is it different because it's a group? I could name other artists I used to enjoy listening to who also turned out to awful (R. Kelly, Chris Brown). There are other artists I've seen live who've been accused of stuff too. Two of my biggest actor crushes have been accused of rape (Armie Hammer, Joel Kinnaman). Paul Walker was known to be a sweet man, but he had an underage girlfriend when he was older. Sex & the City is quite possibly my favorite show of all time, and I'm sure everyone here heard about Chris Noth. These are just a few names at the top of my head. I can't keep up with all rapists/predators/abusers in Hollywood. 

[bluegirl147]

17 minutes ago, RealHousewife said:

I can't keep up with all rapists/predators/abusers in Hollywood. 

The thing that scares me is these are just the ones we know about. And you know this isn't something new. This has been going on forever but now (some) men are finally be held accountable.  

19 minutes ago, RealHousewife said:

Two of my biggest actor crushes have been accused of rape (Armie Hammer, Joel Kinnaman). Paul Walker was known to be a sweet man, but he had an underage girlfriend when he was older. Sex & the City is quite possibly my favorite show of all time, and I'm sure everyone here heard about Chris Noth

I know you were a big fan of Beverly Hills 90210 and Luke Perry was known to be a good guy.

[RealHousewife]

1 minute ago, bluegirl147 said:

The thing that scares me is these are just the ones we know about. And you know this isn't something new. This has been going on forever but now (some) men are finally be held accountable.  

I know you were a big fan of Beverly Hills 90210 and Luke Perry was known to be a good guy.

Oh for sure! And how many are creeps who are only behaving so they don't get into trouble? For women's safety, that's better than them misbehaving, but it's so sad how some men treat women like garbage. 

True. Thank you for reminding me of him. :)

[Bastet]

1 hour ago, RealHousewife said:

Paul Walker was known to be a sweet man, but he had an underage girlfriend when he was older.

I knew him (and his siblings) a little in the late '80s; weird family, from my limited exposure (we had a mutual friend, who was very close to them).  I just looked this up, and at the time of his death, he was 40, she (the girlfriend with whom he was living) was 23, and his daughter was 15.  Girlfriend's age when he started dating her (when he was 33)?  Sixteen.  Fucking gross.  I read his previous girlfriend was also 16 when they met.

Edited June 7, 2022 by Bastet

[Mabinogia]

5 hours ago, Jaded said:

Stoney Westmoreland, Disney 'Andi Mack' actor, pleads guilty to child sex charge

I loved Andi Mack and remember when the father kind of disappeared from the show. Then I read about why and my stomach turned. He was on a show where the main cast were all kids. I cringed when I watched a rerun that he was in, seeing him with the child actors. That is where I can't keep watching even if I love something, because his crime is too close to his art. He is guilty of sex with a child and he was working with children. That ruins any enjoyment I can get and it is a damned shame, because that was a great show and very progressive for Disney.

[OtterMommy]

Reminder: This thread is to discuss predatorial behavior tied to specific cases involving celebrities.  If you would like to discuss why choose not to watch certain actors based on past and/or general behavior, you can do so over here.

Thanks!

[Lady Whistleup]

I have a LITTLE pity for MJ because I honestly feel like he was repeating a lot of the abuse he endured as a kid. Joe Jackson, the Motown execs, I believe they abused him and made him think that a grown man having a relationship with a boy was totally normal.

[Danielg342]

On 6/6/2022 at 10:13 AM, Ms Blue Jay said:

This is incredibly disappointing.  There were some talented people from Canadian Idol, like he and Carly Rae Jepsen.  And look at what Jacob has become.  Carly is an incredible success story though.  I remember both of them auditioning.

Jacob Hoggard saddens me too. He has a lot of talent, and, unlike many of the other Idol participants in general, looked like he was going somewhere with Hedley.

Unfortunately, it looks like a case of getting fame at a point where he just wasn't mature enough to handle it. Not that I wish to make excuses or apologies for what he did, but let's not forget he was 19 on Canadian Idol. Almost immediately he was thrust into a situation where he had remarkable fame and, more importantly, a lot of women throwing themselves at him (sometimes literally, I can imagine). That young, I can see how having that much success just got to his head. Worse, there seemed to be no one there to tell him to slow down and watch himself or he might end up in trouble. It was the perfect storm of someone milking their absolute power without ever having- or even caring about- control over it. He's paid the price for it, rightly so, I would say.

One other thing I want to mention about this trial- because it's come a lot among Canadian Twitter users- is the composition of the jury. Hoggard was tried by a 12-person jury that featured ten men on it. Many wondered how a jury could be constructed like that, arguing that, somehow, a man could not understand something like consent and what sexual assault survivors go through. This forgets that, while the jury deliberated for six days and asked the judge a lot of questions regarding the charges, they did return a conviction on one count.

Personally, I'm not comfortable with such a question. I don't think gender ought to matter when it comes to a jury, just that the members are going to be fair and impartial. I am sympathetic to the fact that a lot of survivors don't get their day in court and a lot of accused criminals walk when they probably shouldn't, but I also don't think the solution is "gaming the system" so that we hit an arbitrary amount of convictions (one that no two people will agree upon, anyway). I'm all for people getting the justice they deserve, but I also want to make sure that's done with a fair and reasonable trial. Because otherwise that justice will mean nothing.

[Ms Blue Jay]

If the person was underage, and both people admitted the incident happened, then there's no real question if it's statutory rape.  I don't really know too much about the details and frankly I don't care.  After I heard about how Jacob was I stopped caring about him as a person and a musician.

[Danielg342]

58 minutes ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

If the person was underage, and both people admitted the incident happened, then there's no real question if it's statutory rape.

The only thing I can think of is that Hoggard said he waited until she was 16 in order to have sex with her, because then she reached the legal age of consent. Icky as that may be, I'm assuming the jury believed there was nothing legally they could do because of that.

I don't know. Unfortunately, jury deliberations are sealed so I can't tell what the jury did and didn't believe. I personally find it odd that he was convicted at all, because this case felt a lot like a "he said-she said" case that is difficult to prove.

[Hiyo]

Harvey Weinstein to be charged with indecent assault in UK.

[BetterButter]

Parents of 18-Year-Old Activist Accuse Ezra Miller of Grooming Daughter with 'Cult-Like' Behavior

Quote

While the parents allege Ezra Miller uses "violence, intimidation" to control their child, the 18-year-old spoke out about experiencing "emotional and psychological manipulation" by the parents

[SusanM]

Just saw a headline saying Depp is considering not pursuing Heard for the damages he was awarded as "this was never about money".  First I'm glad for her sake if he's prepared to not push her into bankruptcy but yeah, it was never about money.  No kidding.  It was all about humiliating her and making her life miserable.  Mission accomplished.

[Ohiopirate02]

3 minutes ago, SusanM said:

Just saw a headline saying Depp is considering not pursuing Heard for the damages he was awarded as "this was never about money".  First I'm glad for her sake if he's prepared to not push her into bankruptcy but yeah, it was never about money.  No kidding.  It was all about humiliating her and making her life miserable.  Mission accomplished.

If it was never about the money, then he would have sued for the lowest amount of money possible to force the trial.  The 50 million he originally sued her for was a number he and his legal team decided on, not the courts.

[CynicalGirl]

Yeah, that would be mighty big of him if he didn't pursue her for damages. Considering she's probably close to bankruptcy already, between paying her lawyers and losing endorsements and the chance to make any more movies at all.

I still don't understand the verdict at all, voting yes to everything, yet only awarding $10m. To me, that means they didn't feel the op-ed cost him Pirates and Fantastic Beasts or they would have awarded much more. So they didn't believe any of her allegations, yet they awarded her $2m for defamation. If they believed all her allegations were false, and she therefore defamed him, why would they decide she was defamed by someone saying her allegations were false?

If anyone else understands this, please explain because it makes NO sense to me.

[Danielg342]

13 minutes ago, CynicalGirl said:

I still don't understand the verdict at all, voting yes to everything, yet only awarding $10m. To me, that means they didn't feel the op-ed cost him Pirates and Fantastic Beasts or they would have awarded much more. So they didn't believe any of her allegations, yet they awarded her $2m for defamation. If they believed all her allegations were false, and she therefore defamed him, why would they decide she was defamed by someone saying her allegations were false?

Best I can say is that the defamation that Amber Heard was awarded for was an allegation made by one of Johnny Depp's lawyers that she had staged a crime scene. The jury determined that the scene in question was not staged by her so what the lawyer said was defamatory. Since Heard alleged other incidents of abuse and since the absence of staging still doesn't mean that what Heard said what happened at that incident was true, Heard could still be liable for defamation, which the jury believed she was.

[Danielg342]

One thing I want to add is that even though the Heard/Depp trial is very much a "he said/she said" kind of ordeal, the court is not bound to a binary decision, i.e., if one is deemed to have been wrong than the other one is right. They could very much conclude that both are not telling the truth or one is only partially telling the truth or even that both are telling the truth to some degree. The court doesn't care about reconstructing what actually happened in those incidents- it just cares about adjudicating whether or not the accounts describing those incidents support the allegations that have been brought before it. In a civil trial, all that's required is to prove that the allegations happened based on "the preponderance of evidence", meaning it's "more likely than not" that what is alleged did occur. This is a far lower standard than "beyond a reasonable doubt", which is the standard at criminal trials. I'm no lawyer so I don't know exactly what the differences in the standards are but I believe that in a civil trial all that's needed to be shown is that the plaintiff was hurt in some way by the defendant's actions- there's no need to prove what each piece of evidence actually means and that what the accused did rose to the definition of whatever charge they are being accused of.

I don't believe there's any doubt that Depp's career was damaged by the allegations that surrounded him. He just had to prove that Heard's op-ed caused that damage. Same thing with Heard- she had to prove that what Depp did damaged her life and her career. The jury determined that Depp just happened to be "more right" in his allegations than Heard was. Whether or not it's the right call I'll just leave for the rest of you to decide.

[Jeanne222]

11 hours ago, CynicalGirl said:

Yeah, that would be mighty big of him if he didn't pursue her for damages. Considering she's probably close to bankruptcy already, between paying her lawyers and losing endorsements and the chance to make any more movies at all.

I still don't understand the verdict at all, voting yes to everything, yet only awarding $10m. To me, that means they didn't feel the op-ed cost him Pirates and Fantastic Beasts or they would have awarded much more. So they didn't believe any of her allegations, yet they awarded her $2m for defamation. If they believed all her allegations were false, and she therefore defamed him, why would they decide she was defamed by someone saying her allegations were false?

If anyone else understands this, please explain because it makes NO sense to me.

One of the jurors was interviewed. He said the $10 million was settled on because some jurors wanted more some less. $10 million was the compromise. 

[Zella]

Federal prosecutors in New York are asking for R. Kelly to be sentenced to over 25 years in prison. He was convicted of racketeering last year involving sexual abuse and trafficking last year. His lawyers are asking for less than 14. He could be eligible for life in prison.

Per the article:

Quote

In Wednesday’s memo, prosecutors wrote that “Aaliyah was only 12 at the time [Kelly’s] sexual abuse of her began and 15 when he secretly and fraudulently married her in an effort to protect himself from the consequences of that abuse.”

They wrote that Kelly’s “actions were brazen, manipulative, controlling and coercive. He has shown no remorse or respect for the law.”

“Put simply, [Kelly’s] crimes were calculated, methodical, and part [of] a long-standing pattern of using his platform as a larger-than-life musical persona and his deep network to gain access to teenagers, many of whom were particularly vulnerable, and then to exploit them for his personal gain and sexual gratification,” prosecutors wrote.

He has another trial in Chicago starting in August. 

https://chicago.suntimes.com/2022/6/8/23160379/r-kelly-sentencing-new-york-prison

Edited June 12, 2022 by Zella

[andromeda331]

22 hours ago, Zella said:

Federal prosecutors in New York are asking for R. Kelly to be sentenced to over 25 years in prison. He was convicted of racketeering last year involving sexual abuse and trafficking last year. His lawyers are asking for less than 14. He could be eligible for life in prison.

Per the article:

He has another trial in Chicago starting in August. 

https://chicago.suntimes.com/2022/6/8/23160379/r-kelly-sentencing-new-york-prison

Come on please be life in prison.  

[Spartan Girl]

23 hours ago, Zella said:

Federal prosecutors in New York are asking for R. Kelly to be sentenced to over 25 years in prison. He was convicted of racketeering last year involving sexual abuse and trafficking last year. His lawyers are asking for less than 14. He could be eligible for life in prison.

Per the article:

He has another trial in Chicago starting in August. 

https://chicago.suntimes.com/2022/6/8/23160379/r-kelly-sentencing-new-york-prison

[Hiyo]

Pop star Kris Wu tried in China for alleged rape.

[Bastet]

The parents of Tokata Iron Eyes, who is alleged to have been groomed and abused for years by Ezra Miller, have obtained a protection order against Miller, but servers have not been able to locate them.  This article summarizes the current situation:

Quote

The parents of Tokata Iron Eyes told the LA Times they are unable to locate Ezra Miller to serve a court order of protection against him, while their 18-year-old activist daughter released a video refuting their claims of cult-like grooming and manipulation by the actor.

Chase Iron Eyes and his wife, Sara Jumping Eagle, said they have an interim protection order from a Standing Rock Sioux tribal court, but the court has been unable to locate Miller to serve it. While Tokata Iron Eyes is 18 years old, tribal courts still have jurisdiction in the matter.

“They move around so much [that] we’re stuck in this legal limbo situation, and we can’t serve them in any place they’re in long enough,” Chase Iron Eyes told the Times in a joint interview with Jumping Eagle. “They’ve been flighty. They’ve been avoiding service, and now there’s public pressure mounting on them to make a decision, which makes us very concerned about Ezra’s volatile nature.”

And the twisted history of the relationship, which began when Tokata was only twelve:

Quote

Miller is accused of grooming Tokata since their first meeting in 2016 while the actor was visiting the Standing Rock Reservation in South Dakota. At the time Tokata, now 18, was 12 and Miller was 23. Tokata’s parents claim Miller supplied their daughter with marijuana, alcohol, and LSD to control and manipulate them.

Miller and Iron Eyes grew close quickly, and the Fantastic Beasts star later flew Tokata, then aged 14, and other members of the tribe to London in 2017 to visit the studio where the movie was filmed. In their petition, Chase Iron Eyes and Jumping Eagles claim Miller tried to sleep in the same bed as their daughter on the trip but was prevented by a chaperone. They also say Miller’s unnatural influence resulted in their daughter eventually dropping out of a private school in Massachusetts last year.

There's a lot more information; I had not read about this mess until now, and it is indeed a mess.  The brainwashed "my parents are lying, this person is my sole protector" video reminds me of one of R. Kelly's victims.

Edited June 13, 2022 by Bastet

[Crashcourse]

So, the parents had absolutely no control over their daughter when she was underaged. 

[Cinnabon]

29 minutes ago, Crashcourse said:

So, the parents had absolutely no control over their daughter when she was underaged. 

They aren’t the ones to blame here.

Edited June 13, 2022 by Cinnabon

[Crashcourse]

8 minutes ago, Cinnabon said:

They aren’t the ones to blame here.

She had been "groomed and abused for years" and the parents had no idea?  I find that hard to believe.  Hell, they flew to London with the creep.

[Cinnabon]

8 minutes ago, Crashcourse said:

She had been "groomed and abused for years" and the parents had no idea?  I find that hard to believe.  Hell, they flew to London with the creep.

The rape and other crimes against a minor were committed by Miller. I’m sure the parents didn’t consent to that. They were obviously too trusting. Miller groomed them as well as their child, which is not uncommon in these situations.

Edited June 13, 2022 by Cinnabon

[Crashcourse]

Just now, Cinnabon said:

The rape and other crimes against a minor were committed by Miller. I’m sure the parents didn’t consent to that. They were obviously too trusting.

And too stupid to be parents.

[Cinnabon]

2 minutes ago, Crashcourse said:

Why the focus on the victims here? It reminds me of people that blame women for their own rapes and assaults because they were out in skimpy clothes, drunk, walking home alone. THEY aren’t the ones to blame, only the rapists are.

Edited June 13, 2022 by Cinnabon

[Spartan Girl]

Unless the parents knowingly consented to leaving their daughter in exchange for a hefty payment (like those garbage parents in that Law and Order episode) they are not to blame.

I must say that all this stuff about Ezra Miller saddens and sickens me. A drug problem is one thing, but this is unforgivable.

[Cinnabon]

9 minutes ago, Spartan Girl said:

Unless the parents knowingly consented to leaving their daughter in exchange for a hefty payment (like those garbage parents in that Law and Order episode) they are not to blame.

I must say that all this stuff about Ezra Miller saddens and sickens me. A drug problem is one thing, but this is unforgivable.

It’s so unfortunate that some people are going to see this as confirming their inaccurate bias that transgender people are often guilty of grooming minors. They are an outlier. A reminder too that Miller uses “they/them” pronouns.

[aradia22]

Quote

Miller is accused of grooming Tokata since their first meeting in 2016 while the actor was visiting the Standing Rock Reservation in South Dakota. At the time Tokata, now 18, was 12 and Miller was 23. Tokata’s parents claim Miller supplied their daughter with marijuana, alcohol, and LSD to control and manipulate them.

Miller and Iron Eyes grew close quickly, and the Fantastic Beasts star later flew Tokata, then aged 14, and other members of the tribe to London in 2017 to visit the studio where the movie was filmed. In their petition, Chase Iron Eyes and Jumping Eagles claim Miller tried to sleep in the same bed as their daughter on the trip but was prevented by a chaperone. They also say Miller’s unnatural influence resulted in their daughter eventually dropping out of a private school in Massachusetts last year.

I know I have a bias against age gap relationships but it's really inexcusable to behave this way with a child. If you have to wait for your soulmate to be "legal"... 

[anna0852]

Between Ezra Miller and Johnny Depp, the Fantastic Beasts series is really screwed 

Edited June 14, 2022 by anna0852

[DearEvette]

2 hours ago, Cinnabon said:

It’s so unfortunate that some people are going to see this as confirming their inaccurate bias that transgender people are often guilty of grooming minors. They are an outlier. A reminder too that Miller uses “they/them” pronouns.

Yeah, that was my first thought as well.  Some of the discourse around the trans community especially amongst those with transphobia is already so toxic that this has the potential to just add another arrow to their quiver.  It is a shame because Miller is just a mess all over the place with their assaults and break-ins.

From the article it also sounds like Tokata may also identify as non-binary since their parents seem to refer to them as 'they' if I am reading that correctly.  Makes me wonder if that is why they might have been especially susceptible to Miller?

[GHScorpiosRule]

1 hour ago, anna0852 said:

Between Ezra Miller and Johnny Depp, the Fantastic Beasts series really screwed 

Not just Fantastic Beasts. Apparently the Justice League series as well. Miller has been playing Flash, and apparently the single movie is all but in the can. Not a word  from DC/WB since all these articles have been coming out. I find that very telling.

[Zella]

35 minutes ago, DearEvette said:

From the article it also sounds like Tokata may also identify as non-binary since their parents seem to refer to them as 'they' if I am reading that correctly.  Makes me wonder if that is why they might have been especially susceptible to Miller?

From what I have read, Tokata is nonbinary. Their parents have said that Tokata had previously identified as nonbinary, queer, and gay but now identifies as nonbinary and trans, and their parents are saying that Miller is influencing this. I am not entirely sure I agree with the parents' reasoning (Tokata very well could have come to that realization on their own without Miller's influence), but it does seem likely to me that Miller used that commonality to groom and manipulate further. 

By the way, Tokata actually responded to all this on Instagram and accused their dad of being transphobic and was especially angry at being accused of not knowing their own mind. It wouldn't surprise me if Tokata is legitimately estranged from their parents for good reasons but is unable to see how problematic and toxic that Miller is. 

*Edited to add: I don't have an opinion on the parents otherwise. I think it is quite likely that Miller also groomed them and manipulated them. But I also suspect the background on all of this is probably pretty messy and complicated. It actually reminds me of a situation in my own family wherein someone had legitimate beefs with their parents being controlling and abusive but it led them to jump into friendships and relationships that were even more controlling as a means of getting away from the parents. It is also possible that Miller is entirely stirring the pot against otherwise good parents. 

Edited June 14, 2022 by Zella

[merylinkid]

If the parents are willing using they/them pronouns for their child as well as Miller, I'm thinking transphobia is not an issue here.    Not that they can't be transphobic against OTHERS but the willingness to even consider non-binary pronouns isn't something the phobics tend to do.   

Remember Michael Jackson.   He groomed the parents as well.   Predators exploit vulnerabilities.   Then use that to further their aims.   Miller could have done the same from the parents AND Miller.  

I'd like a live statement from Tokata without Miller anywhere around.   Then maybe we can see.  

[Zella]

1 hour ago, merylinkid said:

If the parents are willing using they/them pronouns for their child as well as Miller, I'm thinking transphobia is not an issue here.    Not that they can't be transphobic against OTHERS but the willingness to even consider non-binary pronouns isn't something the phobics tend to do.   

Remember Michael Jackson.   He groomed the parents as well.   Predators exploit vulnerabilities.   Then use that to further their aims.   Miller could have done the same from the parents AND Miller.  

I'd like a live statement from Tokata without Miller anywhere around.   Then maybe we can see.  

Yes I thought their willingness to use the correct pronouns seemed at odds with the depiction of them as intolerant. BUT I am also really uncomfortable with anyone telling another person that they know more about their own identity than the person in question, and they are essentially doing that. 

[Notabug]

3 hours ago, Zella said:

Yes I thought their willingness to use the correct pronouns seemed at odds with the depiction of them as intolerant. BUT I am also really uncomfortable with anyone telling another person that they know more about their own identity than the person in question, and they are essentially doing that. 

True, but, it seems the parents have witnessed Tokata's interactions with Miller themselves over time and eventually came to the conclusion that they were being manipulated by Miller.  I presume that the parents initially did trust Miller since the entire family went to London, but, perhaps, with prolonged exposure, they started to doubt their intentions towards Tokata and may have even witnessed Miller telling rather than asking Tokata about their own perceptions of their sexuality.  If the parents repeatedly saw Miller put words in Tokata's mouth and try to tell them who they are and how to feel about it; I could see the parents having real concerns that their child was not acting autonomously.  It seems like Miller has had an agenda for this child all along and the parents could rightfully be questioning just how much Tokata's free will is influencing their decisions and statements vs. how much Tokata is responding to Miller's machinations.

I could see them accepting their child as transgender while still being concerned that their child was not making these statements autonomously.

Edited June 14, 2022 by Notabug

[Zella]

15 minutes ago, Notabug said:

True, but, it seems the parents have witnessed Tokata's interactions with Miller themselves over time and eventually came to the conclusion that they were being manipulated by Miller.  I presume that the parents initially did trust Miller since the entire family went to London, but, perhaps, with prolonged exposure, they started to doubt their intentions towards Tokata and may have even witnessed Miller telling rather than asking Tokata about their own perceptions of their sexuality.  If the parents repeatedly saw Miller put words in Tokata's mouth and try to tell them who they are and how to feel about it; I could see the parents having real concerns that their child was not making these decisions autonomously.  It seems like Miller has had an agenda for this child all along and the parents could rightfully be questioning just how much Tokata's free will is influencing their decisions and statements vs. how much Tokata is responding to Miller's machinations.

I could see them accepting their child as transgender while still being concerned that their child was not making these statements autonomously.

Yes that's all certainly possible, but to my knowledge, it is not what they specifically listed as to what they witnessed. I've seen from them that after Tokata left school, they didn't have their driver's license that it is believed Miller took and appeared to have bruises that are believed to have been inflicted by Miller.

That is very concerning, but just in my experience with the situation in my family, jumping to conclusions about what the victim wants or thinks and ascribing everything to the abuser is a great way to burn your bridges with the victim forever. I can certainly understand why the parents in this situation suspect that, but I think it was really foolish and counterproductive to emphasize that in the accusations when you're also dealing with their personal identification being controlled and potential physical abuse. In my experience, keeping a communication line open is really important, and Tokata's parents shit all over that by insisting that Miller is the only reason their child is identifying as trans. 

I certainly do think the situation is more complicated than what people are seizing on--It does seem like Tokata was not traveling alone with Miller when they were 12, which is good, and that Miller largely gained this influence over Tokata in recent months when they were away at school (probably something Miller was hoping for after grooming them for years). I don't think the parents are the primary bad guys here at all, but I can completely understand why Tokata's response is to double-down on them after that. Their parents are basically just doing exactly what Miller is hoping for--pushing them further into Miller's arms. 

Edited June 14, 2022 by Zella