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

[Trini]

1 hour ago, SunnyBeBe said:

This is what I don’t understand about Jonathon Majors. So, he has multiple charges against him by his former GF for assault. He denies wrongdoing. Claims it never happened. In the immediate wake of the charges, he’s already attached to a new woman.This creates a very risky place for him to be. What if this woman accuses him of assault? That would look very bad. She could be unstable, get angry and call 911 saying that he assaulted her. Does he have complete trust in her? They just started dating. His legal counsel must have certainly told him to AVOID being alone with any woman, until the charges are resolved. He’s putting himself in a risky situation for no reason. That makes me wonder why he would do that, unless it’s a case of arrogance.  
 

https://www.tmz.com/2023/05/21/jonathan-majors-spotted-meagan-good-assault-case/

 

There's a pretty good chance this is a PR relationship to rehab his image. Because otherwise, yes, bad choices all around.

[SunnyBeBe]

8 hours ago, Trini said:

 

There's a pretty good chance this is a PR relationship to rehab his image. Because otherwise, yes, bad choices all around.

I thought about that too.  The thing is, if it’s determined that it’s a contractual relationship to sway public opinion, it could do more damage if revealed.  Either way, I wonder how he’ll come back to a career after this. But, Depp has no trouble. 

Edited May 23, 2023 by SunnyBeBe

[bluegirl147]

6 hours ago, SunnyBeBe said:

But, Depp has no trouble. 

There are big differences between Depp and Majors.  Depp has a long career. Major's career is relatively new. The relationship between Depp and his accuser and Majors and his accuser are different.  Depp is famous around the world.  There are people who don't know who Majors is.

[Bastet]

On 5/17/2023 at 11:05 PM, erylin said:

It's important to consider that the legal system operates on the principle of "innocent until proven guilty." While it's reasonable to have personal reservations about someone based on accusations, we must also respect the legal process and refrain from making definitive judgments until guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

That just plain doesn't work in the case of sexual assault crimes, only one percent of which are ever prosecuted in the first place (the overwhelming majority are never even reported -- significantly because of how the judicial system frequently fails sexual assault victims at every stage of the process -- and then the majority of reports do not result in arrest, and the majority of arrests do not lead to prosecution [and then it's about 50/50 as to whether those handful of prosecutions will result in a conviction]).

The government has to prove to a jury beyond reasonable doubt that someone committed a crime before they can exercise their power to put that person in prison.  Members of the public, on the other hand, are free to engage in a mere boycott based on something other than a verdict.

[angora]

Not to mention, viewers are allowed to dislike an actor/not watch their movies for any reason they want. Not a fan of their acting, not a fan of the movies they pick, they "sold out" when they hit it big, you don't think they're attractive, you think their voice is annoying, they behaved badly in their very public breakup with so-and-so, they seem like a doofus in interviews, you hated that one thing they were in and now you can't watch them anymore, they sounded arrogant in their award speech, and so on and so on. I'm certainly not obligated to continue supporting an actor who's been accused of sexual harassment/assault or domestic violence, whether they've been convicted by a jury or not.

[Irlandesa]

10 hours ago, Bastet said:

That just plain doesn't work in the case of sexual assault crimes, only one percent of which are ever prosecuted in the first place (the overwhelming majority are never even reported -- significantly because of how the judicial system frequently fails sexual assault victims at every stage of the process -- and then the majority of reports do not result in arrest, and the majority of arrests do not lead to prosecution [and then it's about 50/50 as to whether those handful of prosecutions will result in a conviction]).

People in this thread might also be interested in the newly released doc Victim/Suspect on Netflix.  It takes a look at some women accused of and/or convicted of filing a false report and it was eye-opening about how difficult it can be for victims or why they don't even want to bother.

Edited May 24, 2023 by Irlandesa

[Bastet]

22 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

People in this thread might also be interested in the newly released doc Victim/Suspect on Netflix.  It takes a look at some women accused of and/or convicted of filing a false report and it was eye-opening about how difficult it can be for victims or why they don't even want to bother.

Yes, and reveals how the small percentage of reports classified as false is even tinier, because it turns out some of those weren't actually false reports -- cops who didn't believe them used the same shady tactics they use to elicit a false confession to elicit a false recantation, and, most appallingly, sometimes even turned around and charged the victim for making a false statement, which sometimes caused them to agree to plead guilty in exchange for a lighter sentence just to make this nightmare slightly less awful than it could be (or, in at least one case, take her own life to just make it stop).

(I second the recommendation to watch that documentary, which is based on a years-long piece of investigative journalism that revealed an issue many had never even considered -- and showed the scope of the problem to be bigger than even most of those in the know had thought.)

For the overwhelming majority of those subjected to sexual violence, the criminal justice system either does nothing or makes things even worse.  (The civil legal system may provide some small measure of relief, but it's generally not of much help, either; the large majority of victims are once again left without any degree of redress.)  So, no, I'm not going to - in those typical cases where it's not one of the relative handful of attacks adjudicated in court - withhold my own personal judgment based on the allegations, known facts, and realities of society because there's been no trial. 

When I'm filing a civil suit on behalf of a victim, I of course have greater investigatory obligations.  And would have a different set of obligations if I were a juror in a criminal trial (which, as a civil rights lawyer, I would never be seated as, but hypothetically).  If I'm just deciding whether to watch someone's movies/listen to their music/etc. or state on a message board I think they're as guilty as the year is long, I don't.

Edited May 25, 2023 by Bastet

[EtheltoTillie]

23 hours ago, Bastet said:

 if I were a juror in a criminal trial (which, as a civil rights lawyer, I would never be seated as, but hypothetically).  If I'm just deciding whether to watch someone's movies/listen to their music/etc. or state on a message board I think they're as guilty as the year is long, I don't.

I've been seated twice! 

[EtheltoTillie]

But maybe you do police violence cases, which I don't do.  I think I always get picked because I come across as someone who cares about the law, so both sides like me. 

Edited May 25, 2023 by EtheltoTillie

[EtheltoTillie]

I just tried watching the Victim/Suspect documentary, but I had to turn it off after two minutes. I was already too disturbed. 

[SunnyBeBe]

I’m not sure what is going on with this guy (Levinson, tv director.)  It’s very odd, imo.  Why does he seem to get a free pass so often? The new HBO series, The Idol,  soon to air, has gotten low ratings and scathing responses regarding the portrayal of young women.  There’s a thread around here for the series.  It’s sad to see that Lily Rose Depp was a part of it.  
 

https://pagesix.com/2023/05/26/lily-rose-depp-kisses-girlfriend-as-the-idol-is-deemed-exploitative/

 

 

Edited May 27, 2023 by SunnyBeBe

[AstridM]

On 5/26/2023 at 2:49 AM, EtheltoTillie said:

I just tried watching the Victim/Suspect documentary, but I had to turn it off after two minutes. I was already too disturbed. 

I watched just the trailer last night and found it disturbing 😢.

[Jaded]

2 hours ago, SunnyBeBe said:

I’m not sure what is going on with this guy (Levinson, tv director.)  It’s very odd, imo.  Why does he seem to get a free pass so often? The new HBO series, The Idol,  soon to air, has gotten low ratings and scathing responses regarding the portrayal of young women.  There’s a thread around here for the series.  It’s sad to see that Lily Rose Depp was a part of it.  
 

https://pagesix.com/2023/05/26/lily-rose-depp-kisses-girlfriend-as-the-idol-is-deemed-exploitative/

I saw the last name and immediately thought of his father who's been a really successful writer and producer over a span of decades. I haven't watched Euphoria or any of the promotional stuff for The Idol since reading about both in a recent article about the latter was enough to turn me off of both. I didn't know the upcoming show was also co-created by The Weeknd along with Sam Levison until reading the article I previously mentioned. The way The Weeknd was trying to defend the show and tone down how exploitative the content has been described as being made me more than side-eye the both of them.  Most of the articles on this show all mention how complementary Lilly Rose Depp has been in regards to Sam Levison.  I'm not surprised by her comments considering the position she's in right now and wouldn't expect anything different. 

[SunnyBeBe]

24 minutes ago, Jaded said:

I saw the last name and immediately thought of his father who's been a really successful writer and producer over a span of decades. I haven't watched Euphoria or any of the promotional stuff for The Idol since reading about both in a recent article about the latter was enough to turn me off of both. I didn't know the upcoming show was also co-created by The Weeknd along with Sam Levison until reading the article I previously mentioned. The way The Weeknd was trying to defend the show and tone down how exploitative the content has been described as being made me more than side-eye the both of them.  Most of the articles on this show all mention how complementary Lilly Rose Depp has been in regards to Sam Levison.  I'm not surprised by her comments considering the position she's in right now and wouldn't expect anything different. 

I have watched Euphoria.  For adult men to be that focused on teens and explicit sex, nudity, impairment, dysfunction , etc.  is concerning imo.  So, for Levinson to be responsible for something else as bad, if not worse, raises red flags for me.  Apparently, he denies The Idol is based on Britney Spears.  I may check out The Idol, so I can give my personal opinion on it.  

Edited May 27, 2023 by SunnyBeBe

[RealHousewife]

7 hours ago, SunnyBeBe said:

I’m not sure what is going on with this guy (Levinson, tv director.)  It’s very odd, imo.  Why does he seem to get a free pass so often? The new HBO series, The Idol,  soon to air, has gotten low ratings and scathing responses regarding the portrayal of young women.  There’s a thread around here for the series.  It’s sad to see that Lily Rose Depp was a part of it.  
 

https://pagesix.com/2023/05/26/lily-rose-depp-kisses-girlfriend-as-the-idol-is-deemed-exploitative/

 

 

 

3 hours ago, SunnyBeBe said:

I have watched Euphoria.  For adult men to be that focused on teens and explicit sex, nudity, impairment, dysfunction , etc.  is concerning imo.  So, for Levinson to be responsible for something else as bad, if not worse, raises red flags for me.  Apparently, he denies The Idol is based on Britney Spears.  I may check out The Idol, so I can give my personal opinion on it.  

Call me an old lady or a prude, but I’d love more entertainment that’s family-friendly. If adults want to make/watch porn, that’s their business. But nudity and sex scenes becoming more and more frequent in mainstream shows/movies and in the context of teenage stories grosses me out. Maybe I’m more sensitive to this topic because I dabbled in acting, and I hated the pressure of being comfortable with everything. Sometimes I miss the craft, but even in a metoo era, Hollywood is sleazier than ever. 

[Vermicious Knid]

Jury still deliberating in Danny Masterson's rape trial.

Quote

Jurors have deliberated for more than a week without reaching a verdict in the rape retrial of “That ’70s Show” star Danny Masterson, and will have to return and resume talks after the long holiday weekend.

This says to me it will end in another hung jury. 

[Kel Varnsen]

11 hours ago, RealHousewife said:

But nudity and sex scenes becoming more and more frequent in mainstream shows/movies

Is that actually true though. I can remember in decades past you could see nudity in PG movies. Sure that was before PG-13 was a thing, but even now having nudity in anything but an R rated movie probably isn't going to happen.  And with how the movie business works it's a lot harder to make money in something that is R rated, so pretty every thing is PG-13.

[Trini]

Speaking of teens and nudity....

'Romeo & Juliet Sex Abuse Lawsuit Dismissed By Judge '

Quote

Stating that the $100 million in damages action against Paramount Pictures from Olivia Hussey and Leonard Whiting contains a “gross mischaracterization” of the bedroom scenes in question from the film and citing the First Amendment, Judge Alison Mackenzie put forth a tentative ruling to dismiss the case.

“Defendant’s special motion to strike Plaintiffs’ entire Complaint …is GRANTED as each cause of action asserted therein arises from protected activity and Plaintiffs have failed to show a probability of success on the merits of those claims,” she wrote Thursday of Paramount’s (successful) attempt to have the matter tossed under California’s anti-SLAPP laws.

Also here:

https://ew.com/movies/romeo-and-juliet-nude-scene-lawsuit-dismissed/

 

[andromeda331]

On 5/27/2023 at 6:27 PM, RealHousewife said:

 

Call me an old lady or a prude, but I’d love more entertainment that’s family-friendly. If adults want to make/watch porn, that’s their business. But nudity and sex scenes becoming more and more frequent in mainstream shows/movies and in the context of teenage stories grosses me out. Maybe I’m more sensitive to this topic because I dabbled in acting, and I hated the pressure of being comfortable with everything. Sometimes I miss the craft, but even in a metoo era, Hollywood is sleazier than ever. 

I don't mind that stuff. But I really want it to happen when it makes sense with the story and with the characters. I don't want sex scenes thrown in just because same with nudity which seems like case more often.  

[Jaded]

On 5/28/2023 at 2:08 AM, Vermicious Knid said:

Jury still deliberating in Danny Masterson's rape trial.

This says to me it will end in another hung jury. 

Yeah, I've been keeping up with this most recent trial too. The jury asked to hear testimony read back to them from one of the three survivors at one point. Tony Ortega who's written about Scientology since the 90's has a website with lots of info about it's history and goings on. He has a Substack now that has a free and paid option. I signed up for the free version and he's been covering the trial with daily updates from the courthouse. Here's the latest video one (I'm posting a YT version too that I learned about from the linked video) where he mentions that Danny's attorney showed up on and Friday approached the court clerk about something. He figures it wasn't anything too important since the DA's office wasn't contacted for them to come down. The jury returns Wednesday which is the same day there will be an evidentiary hearing about a plethora of leaked discovery material that included a lot of personal info which made it's way to Scientology. Leah Remni wrote a long article about it on her Substack earlier this month. She explains it a lot better.

 

 

Edited May 29, 2023 by Jaded

[RealHousewife]

On 5/28/2023 at 6:40 AM, Kel Varnsen said:

Is that actually true though. I can remember in decades past you could see nudity in PG movies. Sure that was before PG-13 was a thing, but even now having nudity in anything but an R rated movie probably isn't going to happen.  And with how the movie business works it's a lot harder to make money in something that is R rated, so pretty every thing is PG-13.

Maybe we've just seen different movies. I admit as much as I love older stuff, I haven't seen a lot of older movies that everyone else seems to have watched. Also possible that the nudity in older stuff was more tasteful, so perhaps it didn't shock/bother me. Seeing boobs or a butt for a few seconds is very different from what I've heard of Euphoria and The Idol.

6 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

I don't mind that stuff. But I really want it to happen when it makes sense with the story and with the characters. I don't want sex scenes thrown in just because same with nudity which seems like case more often.  

Exactly. Some of my favorite movies and TV shows ever feature nudity and even sex scenes. I'm not at all saying make everything Hallmark, just that it would be nice to have stuff that's more family-friendly, and even outside of that market, no need to get gratuitous imo. 

[Guest]

On 5/28/2023 at 4:40 AM, Kel Varnsen said:

Is that actually true though. I can remember in decades past you could see nudity in PG movies. Sure that was before PG-13 was a thing, but even now having nudity in anything but an R rated movie probably isn't going to happen.  And with how the movie business works it's a lot harder to make money in something that is R rated, so pretty every thing is PG-13.

Exactly this is particularly true when it comes to movies. I grew up in the 80’s and am frequently shocked by the things I saw in PG movies. The shower scene in Sixteen Candles comes to mind. Movies of the 70’s and 80’s did a lot of things you would never see in a most theatrical releases today. 

14 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

I don't mind that stuff. But I really want it to happen when it makes sense with the story and with the characters. I don't want sex scenes thrown in just because same with nudity which seems like case more often.  

I feel the same way. It feels like many of the premium cable and certain streaming series throw in sex scenes just because they can in ways that actually detract for the plot. 

[Wildcard]

Quote

Maybe we've just seen different movies. I admit as much as I love older stuff, I haven't seen a lot of older movies that everyone else seems to have watched. Also possible that the nudity in older stuff was more tasteful, so perhaps it didn't shock/bother me. Seeing boobs or a butt for a few seconds is very different from what I've heard of Euphoria and The Idol

I actually think it's gotten less in the culture now (for many different reasons). A good example is "Trading Places". There's two nude scenes with Jamie Lee Curtis that really didn't have a plot reason to be there.  Fast forward to "True Lies" - she's supposed to be a call girl but there was no nudity (and it was rated R)

[Kel Varnsen]

6 minutes ago, Wildcard said:

I actually think it's gotten less in the culture now (for many different reasons). A good example is "Trading Places". There's two nude scenes with Jamie Lee Curtis that really didn't have a plot reason to be there.  Fast forward to "True Lies" - she's supposed to be a call girl but there was no nudity (and it was rated R)

My first thought was Titanic, which is PG-13 which has a topless Kate Winslet and a sex scene. I don't think you would see that today. Splash also comes to mind which is PG.

[Guest]

7 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

My first thought was Titanic, which is PG-13 which has a topless Kate Winslet and a sex scene. I don't think you would see that today. Splash also comes to mind which is PG.

The first time I watched Ghostbusters (PG) as an adult, I was very surprised by the ghost sex scene. Titanic is one of the last that I can remember included nudity in a PG-13. Once the 2000’s came around and some of the kids who were raised on wildly inappropriate content in PG movies became parents and began to complain, anything remotely sexual was relegated to R ratings. 

[EtheltoTillie]

4 hours ago, Wildcard said:

I actually think it's gotten less in the culture now (for many different reasons). A good example is "Trading Places". There's two nude scenes with Jamie Lee Curtis that really didn't have a plot reason to be there.  Fast forward to "True Lies" - she's supposed to be a call girl but there was no nudity (and it was rated R)

She’s a call girl in Trading Places, not in True Lies. 

[Wildcard]

7 minutes ago, EtheltoTillie said:

She’s a call girl in Trading Places, not in True Lies. 

She's supposed to pretend to be a call girl in True Lies also (sent on assignment by Arnold and Tom). My point is that in the 80's - she would be nude in this scene.

[DrSpaceman73]

I don't know how I missed the fact sixteen candles is pg and has that shower scene. 

[Irlandesa]

3 hours ago, Wildcard said:

She's supposed to pretend to be a call girl in True Lies also (sent on assignment by Arnold and Tom). My point is that in the 80's - she would be nude in this scene.

Except she's a married mother pretending to be a call girl.  A real call girl might be naked but a married mother faking it would probably attempt to avoid it.

The problem hasn't just been nudity with cable shows, it's the focus on female nudity even when it's not necessary.  HBO execs were known for requiring it, although maybe they've pulled back on that.

Edited May 30, 2023 by Irlandesa

[FilmTVGeek80]

On 5/23/2023 at 3:35 PM, Bastet said:

That just plain doesn't work in the case of sexual assault crimes, only one percent of which are ever prosecuted in the first place (the overwhelming majority are never even reported -- significantly because of how the judicial system frequently fails sexual assault victims at every stage of the process -- and then the majority of reports do not result in arrest, and the majority of arrests do not lead to prosecution [and then it's about 50/50 as to whether those handful of prosecutions will result in a conviction]).

The government has to prove to a jury beyond reasonable doubt that someone committed a crime before they can exercise their power to put that person in prison.  Members of the public, on the other hand, are free to engage in a mere boycott based on something other than a verdict.

What erylin said makes perfect sense, and I'm not sure why there should be an exemption in sexual assault cases no matter how few get prosecuted. It's still innocent until proven guilty. And if a member of the public decides they're guilty merely based on an accusation alone and doesn't want to watch their movies, etc. so be it. The problem is lately there's a mob mentality where people have decided that because they think someone is guilty that person shouldn't be allowed to work PERIOD. People should not get to make that decision for the masses.

[Makai]

9 hours ago, FilmTVGeek80 said:

What erylin said makes perfect sense, and I'm not sure why there should be an exemption in sexual assault cases no matter how few get prosecuted. It's still innocent until proven guilty.

Because that is a purely legal standard and the public is under no obligation to follow it. Their only legal obligation in these cases is to not break the law. If the general public was required to adhere to that standard it would be taking away their rights.

Since I am not obligated to adhere to “innocent until proven guilty” I get to evaluate the effectiveness of our legal system in determining how much weight I am going to give the legal process. In sexual assault cases the legal process holds very little weight in my evaluation. 

9 hours ago, FilmTVGeek80 said:

And if a member of the public decides they're guilty merely based on an accusation alone and doesn't want to watch their movies, etc. so be it. The problem is lately there's a mob mentality where people have decided that because they think someone is guilty that person shouldn't be allowed to work PERIOD. People should not get to make that decision for the masses.

People make up the masses and entertainers have chosen a profession based entirely on appealing to the masses so their careers are always going to be decided by people. Someone who has been accused is entitled to due process and to be innocent until proven guilty in the eyes of the law. They are not entitled to star in a movie or tv show. 

Edited May 30, 2023 by Makai

[Ohiopirate02]

24 minutes ago, Makai said:

People make up the masses and entertainers have chosen a profession based entirely on appealing to the masses so their careers are always going to be decided by people. Someone who has been accused is entitled to due process and to be innocent until proven guilty in the eyes of the law. They are not entitled to star in a movie or tv show. 

And it is impossible for a person to watch every TV show/movie currently on air/streaming, listen to every currently recording artist, read every book published, etc.  We all have our own criteria for selecting which ones to consume, and if someone decides credible accusations of assault is one of those criteria so be it.  There's worse reasons for not watching something.

[AstridM]

12 hours ago, FilmTVGeek80 said:

What erylin said makes perfect sense, and I'm not sure why there should be an exemption in sexual assault cases no matter how few get prosecuted. It's still innocent until proven guilty. And if a member of the public decides they're guilty merely based on an accusation alone and doesn't want to watch their movies, etc. so be it. The problem is lately there's a mob mentality where people have decided that because they think someone is guilty that person shouldn't be allowed to work PERIOD. People should not get to make that decision for the masses.

and ultimately, common people don’t make hiring/firing decisions. Those in charge make those decisions. 

Edited May 30, 2023 by AstridM

[merylinkid]

18 hours ago, AstridM said:

and ultimately, common people don’t make hiring/firing decisions. Those in charge make those decisions. 

Which is why certain people STILL get work despite the "masses" not liking them.  Also the "mob" that wants these people to never work again is always countered by a "mob" who are "my favorite, right or wrong and they are never wrong."   Believe me if these "mobs" really kept people from working through boycotts of their movies/shows/songs, no one would hire them because they wouldn't make money for the TPTB.   Since they do keep making money for TPTB the mobs really aren't that effective at stopping someone's career.

[Jaded]

Danny Masterson was just found guilty on two counts and the jury couldn't decide on the third. Going to add more info.

Danny Masterson Guilty On Two Counts, Hung Jury On Third, Taken Into Custody

Danny Masterson Found Guilty on Two Counts in Sexual Assault Retrial

 

Edited May 31, 2023 by Jaded

[BetterButter]

 

[badhaggis]

11 minutes ago, Jaded said:

Danny Masterson was just found guilty on two counts and the jury couldn't decide on the third. Going to add more info.

Danny Masterson Guilty On Two Counts, Hung Jury On Third, Taken Into Custody

Thank God! I was afraid it would be another hung jury. I am glad they took him into custody.

[Bastet]

I feel terrible for the third victim, but relieved by the two guilty verdicts -- even though the prosecution made some great changes from the first case, I feared it was going to be another hung jury all around.

[merylinkid]

YES!!!!!!!!

He is hopefully going away for a long time.  Please don't let the judge let him off with "probation" so as not to 'ruin his career."

[roamyn]

1 hour ago, badhaggis said:

Thank God! I was afraid it would be another hung jury. I am glad they took him into custody.

It's abt time!!

👏 👏 to the jury.

[Trini]

He had been discussed here before, I believe:

https://ew.com/movies/armie-hammer-sexual-assault-case-los-angeles-dropped/

Quote

The Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office will not file sexual assault charges against embattled actor Armie Hammer following what has been described as a "thorough review" by prosecutors.

In a statement obtained by EW, Tiffiny Blacknell, director of the D.A. office's bureau of communications, said prosecutors found "insufficient evidence" to charge Hammer with rape, citing the "complexity of the relationship" between the actor and his accuser, previously identified as a woman named Effie, and "inability to prove a non-consensual, forcible sexual encounter."

"As prosecutors, we have an ethical responsibility to only charge cases that we can prove beyond a reasonable doubt," the statement read. "We know that it is hard for women to report sexual assault. Even when we cannot move forward with a prosecution, our victim service representatives will be available to those who seek our victim support services."

 

[Vermicious Knid]

I am surprised and pleased Masterson was found guilty. Usually that doesn't happen after 6-7 days of deliberations. I don't do social medial but I'm sure Leah Remini is doing virtual cartwheels online. 

This may be of interest to some of you. We've discussed how/why/when it comes to separating the art from the artist when that person is revealed to be despicable and where to draw the line. A new book grapples with that very subject. Monsters: A Fan's Dilemma, by Claire Dederer.

Quote

 

...as Claire Dederer points out in her superb new book, Monsters, the problem arises when great art is made by men who've done bad things: men like Picasso, Hemingway, Roman Polanski, Miles Davis, Woody Allen and, yes, Mailer.

Do we put blinders on and just focus on the work? Do geniuses, as Dederer asks, get a "hall pass" for their behavior? Or, do we "cancel" the art of men — and some women — who've done "monstrous" things?...

The subtitle of Monsters is A Fan's Dilemma: the dilemma being still loving, say, the music of Wagner or Michael Jackson; still being caught up in movies like Chinatown or maybe even Manhattan. In short, Dederer wants to dive deep into the murk of being "unwilling to give up the work [of art you love], and [yet, also being] unwilling to look away from the stain [of the monster who created it]."

 

[Spartan Girl]

And speaking of people never held accountable:

 

[Anduin]

48 minutes ago, Vermicious Knid said:

This may be of interest to some of you. We've discussed how/why/when it comes to separating the art from the artist when that person is revealed to be despicable and where to draw the line. A new book grapples with that very subject. Monsters: A Fan's Dilemma, by Claire Dederer.

Let's take musicians, for example. Richard Wagner died in 1883, long before any of us were born. While Varg Vikernes is still alive and kicking. So I'll listen to the dead one and not to the living one. It feels like, his music can no longer hurt anyone. Amazing what a hundred years of death will do for someone's reputation.

[Vermicious Knid]

You may want to pick a different example, as his anti-Semitism made him Hitler's favorite composer.

[Anduin]

17 minutes ago, Vermicious Knid said:

You may want to pick a different example, as his anti-Semitism made him Hitler's favorite composer.

Yeah, that's what I mean. He's been dead long enough to be whitewashed. While Varg is still alive to spread hate.

[Anduin]

In other news, Ghislaine Maxwell found herself being extorted while in prison. She informed on them, but now they're out of solitary and looking for revenge. Gosh, what an awkward scenario. Sounds like she couldn't win.

It's a nice day outside. Barely a cloud in the sky. Maybe I should step onto the balcony and breathe some fresh air. Even if it's a little cool, it won't exactly kill me. Also, I have my meal tonight half-cooked. And a convicted sex offender will probably die in jail. My life isn't perfect, but it sure beats the alternative.

[andromeda331]

I'm so happy Masterson was found guilty. I was really worried he wouldn't be.

[Blergh]

2 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

I'm so happy Masterson was found guilty. I was really worried he wouldn't be.

Completely agree!

Now can we hope that Bijou Phillips will FINALLY do herself and,especially, their daughter a favor and DIVORCE him?!

I'm no fan of either of the so-called adults but neither Miss Phillips nor especially their minor daughter deserves to keep ties with such a monstrous creep!

[merylinkid]

10 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

And speaking of people never held accountable:

 

Hasn't Miller been arrested?   How are they gonna shoot a movie from prison?

As to what I wrote yesterday.   WB must still believe Miller can bring in the $$$ or they would have cut them in a heartbeat.