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

[Cherpumple]

7 hours ago, Mabinogia said:

There is the interesting dynamic where a woman naked is seen as sexy, an invitation, hot, basically, all about sex, while a man getting naked is funny, boyishly impish, "cute", it's all about having a sense of humour.

This is highlighted even more by the rare occasions when the female nudity is meant to be viewed as the exact opposite, or distinctly unsexy. Famous examples are the bathtub lady in the Shining, Kathy Bates' infamous hot tub scene in About Schmidt, and the reveal of the real, old lady version of Melisandre on Game of Thrones (also, funnily enough, getting out of a tub). Despite the larger context of these scenes, the character building, the plot development, etc., the overwhelming reaction to scenes like these is usually boiled down to "Ew! Who'd want to have sex with that?!" And even when these scenes are played for laughs (isn't there one like this in There's Something About Mary, or Kingpin?), the "joke" is still centered around how gross it would be to have sex with such an ugly woman.

[JustHereForFood]

13 hours ago, Mabinogia said:

I also wonder, in this case specifically, how much Barrowman's behaviour and the acceptance those in power showed of it informed Clarke's behaviour, in a "well, if he can get away with rubbing his dick on people, I should be able to do things too" way. 

It could have been a factor. Sadly, I think that there were probably many other people in higher positions that he saw to be getting away with even worse stuff, that we don't know about yet. It seems to be a vicious, hard-to-break cycle.

[Hiyo]

Marilyn Manson sued by former personal assistant for sexual assault.

Ashley Walters claims rock star also physically assaulted her during her employment.

[Vermicious Knid]

Torchwood audio drama starring John Barrowman and David Tennant scrapped. He had no consequences for years even though his behavior was publicly known, now the pigeons are coming home to roost. 

[Stats Queen]

On 5/17/2021 at 3:13 PM, Crashcourse said:

I watched that funeral on tv and I remember Jesse Jackson sitting there, trying his best not to look at Ariana Grande.  I was uncomfortable watching her, but I agree the preacher was out of line.  

Me too, it creeped me out at the time and I don’t always remember these hints, but this one I did remember.

I know he had Parkinson’s at the time which may have affected things. I am not a personal fan of his as he seems to show up to events where he will get lots of media attention vs. personally doing impactful thing upon which the media could report. That my personal opinion/impression of him and other’s may have different opinions, impressions and experiences with him that are different than mine. 

Edited May 20, 2021 by Stats Queen

[possibilities]

While it may be true that certain people think: "If he could get away with ___ , then I should be able as well," I don't consider it any kind of excuse. It's equally possible to see terrible behavior and think: "That's horrible, I would never do such a thing." Basically, if you act horrible, it's on you. That others did it should not imply permission, nor would it make the behavior appealing to someone who wasn't inclined to horribleness themselves. Moreover, we are talking about adults, not toddlers. I just can't buy the idea that these people don't know better. They absolutely know better and they do not care, or they actually enjoy the abusiveness of it.

There has been no time in history when there was no distinction between showing respect and acting abusive. People know what they are doing. Putting your genitals on a coworker, copping a feel, or forcing someone to disrobe just because you can do so.... none of that is behavior that anyone plausibly thinks: "No problem! Who could object!?"

Anyone doing those things is simply taking advantage, and does not actually think it's professional behavior or a perfectly fine way to behave. We teach children better than that, it's basic politeness at minimum, and actually I've never met a kid who actually had to be told any of that stuff past a very young age. The children who keep doing it are either clearly impaired or are acting out and well-aware of what they're doing. There are ZERO adults who are not aware of these basic rules of society.

[paulvdb]

1 hour ago, possibilities said:

While it may be true that certain people think: "If he could get away with ___ , then I should be able as well," I don't consider it any kind of excuse. It's equally possible to see terrible behavior and think: "That's horrible, I would never do such a thing." Basically, if you act horrible, it's on you. That others did it should not imply permission, nor would it make the behavior appealing to someone who wasn't inclined to horribleness themselves. Moreover, we are talking about adults, not toddlers. I just can't buy the idea that these people don't know better. They absolutely know better and they do not care, or they actually enjoy the abusiveness of it.

There are people who don't do bad things because they don't want to do bad things. And there are people who don't do bad things because they are afraid of being punished when they are caught. The latter group would be encouraged when they see other people getting away with doing bad things.

[Llywela]

48 minutes ago, paulvdb said:

There are people who don't do bad things because they don't want to do bad things. And there are people who don't do bad things because they are afraid of being punished when they are caught. The latter group would be encouraged when they see other people getting away with doing bad things.

This is why the culture in any workplace is so important. Management sets the tone. If a clear standard is set and adhered to, those who might be inclined toward bullying or abuse are more likely to rein themselves in because they know such behaviour won't be tolerated, and if they do step out of line, action is taken accordingly. But if there is more of a 'lads will be lads' culture of tolerance, it can quickly become a slippery slope, with the boundary of what is acceptable pushed back more and more as they learn what they can get away with.

I'm remembering how Christopher Eccleston left Doctor Who after that first season and cited a difficult working environment as the reason. As a viewer, I really enjoyed that first season, but clearly all was not right behind the scenes.

[merylinkid]

31 minutes ago, Llywela said:

If a clear standard is set and adhered to, those who might be inclined toward bullying or abuse are more likely to rein themselves in

You, you, you mean, they CAN control themselves?   But, but but, they just can't help it.   They see a pretty woman they have grope/grab/expose themselves/molest.    At least that is what they would have us believe.   

Both @Llywela and @possibilities are right.   They know what they are doing is not acceptable.   They don't care.  Satisfying their desire for power is more important than respect for anyone.

[JustHereForFood]

26 minutes ago, Llywela said:

I'm remembering how Christopher Eccleston left Doctor Who after that first season and cited a difficult working environment as the reason. As a viewer, I really enjoyed that first season, but clearly all was not right behind the scenes.

And this is now especially sad for me, because season 1 is my most favorite and Christopher is my favorite Doctor after Peter Capaldi.

Also, my understanding from coming into the fandom couple years ago was that the prevailing opinion was that Christopher Eccleston was the one who was clearly "difficult" in his exit. The pattern seems to be repeating itself when it comes to people speaking up.

[Llywela]

39 minutes ago, merylinkid said:

You, you, you mean, they CAN control themselves?   But, but but, they just can't help it.   They see a pretty woman they have grope/grab/expose themselves/molest.    At least that is what they would have us believe.   

Both @Llywela and @possibilities are right.   They know what they are doing is not acceptable.   They don't care.  Satisfying their desire for power is more important than respect for anyone.

But the slippery slope doesn't have to go that far. The behaviour can be reined in. No one in my workplace wanders around with their willy out (at least, they didn't before we all switched to homeworking, I can't answer for what they are all doing now!) Because they know it isn't acceptable and they would be fired if they did. If the first time Barrowman flashed his co-workers he'd been told in no uncertain terms that such behaviour was not acceptable (instead of everyone apparently laughing along with him, whether they actually found it amusing or not), that would have set a tone that could have been carried forward. Instead...the slippery slope spiralled downward.

[Unclejosh]

Just wanted to add that Brett Butler from Grace Under Fire had instances on her show that eventually led to cancellation because she was flashing and being inappropriate with her underage male costar as one example of while the VAST percentage of flashing bits is male, there have been women who are guilty of this.  I am sure she thought she was doing it as a joke too.  I could be wrong, but another example was in the movie Just One of the Guys, the lead ended up doing topless last minute flashing and the actor in the scene was not prepared as he thought she would be wearing something or pasties.  I might be mis-remembering the actual movie but I know I heard it on a commentary track of some comedy movie and they wanted to get the actor's real reaction. 

From personal experience I have seen more women flashing than men as a joke during parties when I had zero interest in seeing it which has nothing to do with the power dynamics of a movie set but I think it shows that there are people who do not realize that others may not feel the same way they do about nudity and the way it can make others feel when it is forced upon them.

Of course as someone who was abused by women physically and sexually from a young age, I might be more sensitive to it when a women does it than a man.  Like I have no problem with nudity if that expectation is set such as a nude beach or something.  Having girls flash me and grab my hand and put it on them as a joke at parties is not appreciated which happened multiple times when I was younger.  Because I was seen as sexually non-threatening they thought it was ok.  And yes this is how I was referred to by women most of my life.  I was often seen as "one of the girls" despite be a hetero male.  

Conversely I have laughed and at the time had no issue with seeing guys teabag each other unsuspectingly as a joke.  Someone recorded one party where this occurred and whenever our group of friends (male and female) got together, by the end of the night the women were always the ones wanting to watch the tape and laughing the most.  They even ended up taking it from the person who recorded it and would pass it around their own group of friends.  At the time nobody thought anything of it. I wonder if the guys who got teabagged or the women who laughed and traded that tape around it feel differently now.

Of course NONE of the above applies to a workplace and if it occurs anyone who is uncomfortable should feel empowered to state they are uncomfortable and then it should NEVER happen again.  I am not in favor of immediate punishment for a one off incident of something that is clearly an attempt at a joke but if it is clear it is a pattern or an ongoing issue then it needs to be taken care of swiftly and with permanent consequences.

Long story short fuck Noel Clark and John Barrowman is on the ledge for me.  It sounds like he was made aware that what he felt was a joke was not and has changed accordingly.  I could be wrong and if so fuck him too.  But from what I read it has not happened since and I want to believe in personal growth and people evolving in their attitudes and beliefs on how their actions affect others.  

Just my opinion.  I am probably in the minority on this.

 

Edited May 20, 2021 by Unclejosh
Correct name

[biakbiak]

13 minutes ago, Unclejosh said:

Just wanted to add that Grace Butler had instances on her show that eventually led to cancellation because she was flashing and being inappropriate with her underage male costa

Her name is Brett and she was also according to her and those around her doing a shit ton of drugs at the time so who knows what was going through her head and unlike the examples of the men doing it she faced consequences for her actions in real time.

Edited May 20, 2021 by biakbiak

[Unclejosh]

31 minutes ago, biakbiak said:

Her name is Brett and she was also according to her and those around her doing a shit ton of drugs at the time so who knows what was going through her head and unlike the examples of the men doing it she faced consequences for her actions in real time.

Well not really real time. Her show went on for several years after the minor quit the show due to her actions.  Her drug use worsened over time and ratings fell.  But it sure affected her long term.  But it seems to me it was more the drug use and other behavior than that issue based on the fact that the show wasn't immediately cancelled. They were willing to recast the kid role and keep her employed after the incidents and if no other drug issues were involved I suspect it would have been overlooked just like some of the men. 

For John Paul Steuer too. He quit acting as a result and ended up killing himself in 2018. Not saying it was directly related but it was certainly in the pot of things in his life that led to his struggles.

[BetterButter]

Danny Masterson Ordered to Stand Trial on Rape Charges

Quote

A judge on Friday ordered “That ’70s Show” actor Danny Masterson to stand trial on charges that he raped three women nearly 20 years ago.

 

[catlover79]

I cried watching Lady Gaga recall her assault:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/05/21/entertainment/lady-gaga-rape-oprah-interview-intl-scli-wellness/index.html

[Kromm]

25 minutes ago, catlover79 said:

I cried watching Lady Gaga recall her assault:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/05/21/entertainment/lady-gaga-rape-oprah-interview-intl-scli-wellness/index.html

Hmm. I wonder if we should be referring to her as Stefani for this.  A clear and deliberate decision seems to have been made in the advertising:

 

[Blergh]

2 hours ago, BetterButter said:

Danny Masterson Ordered to Stand Trial on Rape Charges

 

I wonder if Chynna Phillips Baldwin will keep claiming  her brother-in-law is innocent and framed even after this. 

[AimingforYoko]

Bull showrunner Glenn Gordon Caron out following workplace investigation.

Sounds like it's a complete shitshow over there. It's been renewed, though. To quote Joe Pesci in Casino, "Always the dollars. Always the dollars."

[Blergh]

5 hours ago, AimingforYoko said:

Bull showrunner Glenn Gordon Caron out following workplace investigation.

Sounds like it's a complete shitshow over there. It's been renewed, though. To quote Joe Pesci in Casino, "Always the dollars. Always the dollars."

I wonder if either Bruce Willis or Demi Moore have regretted naming their firstborn child Rumer Glenn. Yes, they did evidently use his name as their offspring's middle name as he was the Moonlighting producer at the time of her birth.  And will Cybil Shepherd weigh on this latest development? 

[supposebly]

16 hours ago, AimingforYoko said:

Bull showrunner Glenn Gordon Caron out following workplace investigation.

I don't only side-eye CBS here, but all the people who keep watching and thus keep this shitshow on the air.

[Annber03]

It really irritated me how, on one of the season DVDs for "Criminal Minds", they put the pilot episode of "Bull" on there as part of the bonus features. I had no interest in watching that show as it was, and I'm certainly even less likely to watch it if it's being foisted on me like that. Leave that space for some cool BTS stuff that's, y'know, actually related to the show I'm buying the DVD for. 

(It also seemed weird to put it on a DVD for that show because if they're going to do such a thing, wouldn't it make more sense to put that on an "NCIS" DVD, since Weatherly was on that show? Why do it for a whole other series that isn't in any way similar or connected to "Bull"?)

Anywho, yeah, sure glad they kept this show, which looks like it has issues across the board, instead of keeping one of the one that got cancelled. Or at the very least, they could've gotten rid of this show and kept one of the shows now moving to the Paramount+ streaming service on the actual network instead. 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, supposebly said:

I don't only side-eye CBS here, but all the people who keep watching and thus keep this shitshow on the air.

Most of them have no clue about the behind the scenes drama. 

[supposebly]

3 hours ago, Dani said:

Most of them have no clue about the behind the scenes drama. 

I don't know about most, but the crap with Eliza Dushku was big news.

[biakbiak]

Just now, supposebly said:

I don't know about most, but the crap with Eliza Dushku was big news.

I know Eliza Dushku fans from Buffy who had no idea that happened. News, specifically entertainment news, is very siloed due to all the different ways people get information. CBS and Bull skew older so I wouldn’t be at all surprised if a lot of the audience didn’t know about it all or the specific details. 

[WinnieWinkle]

6 minutes ago, biakbiak said:

CBS and Bull skew older so I wouldn’t be at all surprised if a lot of the audience didn’t know about it all or the specific details. 

Yep.  First I heard about any of this was what I read here.  I don't watch Bull but my husband is a fan and he had no idea about any of this either.  Could be because we're Canadian (maybe?) but most likely it's just that we have little interest in most current celebrity news since we don't know who most of the current celebrities are so we aren't watching Entertainment Tonight type shows or reading gossip magazines.   Assuming this kind of news would even have been covered there of course.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, supposebly said:

I don't know about most, but the crap with Eliza Dushku was big news.

Was it? I didn’t hear about it until it was mentioned here. If I hadn’t searched out more information I would have never seen a headline for it. 
My impression was that it was big news only if you pay attention to those kinds of stories. Most of the things talked about here isn’t even a blip of the radar of anyone I know in real life. 

Edited May 23, 2021 by Guest

[biakbiak]

16 minutes ago, Dani said:

Most of the things talked about here isn’t even a blip of the rarer of anyone I know in real life.

I mean I know a ton of people who don’t know shit about the shows they watch including the names of some of the actors and most definitely the creator/show runner. I think people, myself included, who are avid consumers of pop culture to the point that we talk about and read about it online underestimate how a fairly large part of the population consumer tv and movies. 

Edited May 23, 2021 by biakbiak

[Zella]

My grandparents attempted to watch Bull when it first aired because they liked Weatherly on NCIS, and they thought it was dumb, so they only saw a handful of episodes. (This is significant because if they think something is dumb, but they enjoy making fun of it, they will still watch. This is how we watched multiple seasons of Madame Secretary. 🤣 But they thought Bull was both dumb and not fun to make fun of, so here we are.)

In any event, if they'd enjoyed it enough to keep watching, I doubt they ever would have heard any reporting about what went on behind the scenes. I certainly did, but I am way more tuned into entertainment news than they are, just in general. 

Just now, biakbiak said:

I mean I know a ton of people who don’t know shit about the shows they watch including the names of some of the actors and most definitely the creator/show runner. I think people, myself included, who are avid consumers of pop culture to the point that we talk about and read it online underestimate how a fairly large part of the population consumer tv and movies. 

Yes, definitely this! I know a lot of people of all ages who are way more disconnected from entertainment news than anyone on this site. I know more about the behind-the-scenes of the shows they watch than they do. 

[possibilities]

I've known people who don't even know if their show was cancelled or renewed, until they notice it's not on the schedule anymore. 

[Irlandesa]

35 minutes ago, Dani said:

My impression was that it was big news only if you pay attention to those kinds of stories. Most of the things talked about here isn’t even a blip of the radar of anyone I know in real life. 

It was big news and covered in the main stream media but it was also a fast moving story.  We didn't have months and months and months of stories coming out about it.

[DearEvette]

Les Moonves was the big story with CBS.  The Eliza Dushku stuff was brought to light in the aftermath of Moonves when CBS did an internal audit.  She had already had her settlement pre-Moonves revelations.  Her story was basically yet one of the many skeletons that fell out of the closet with the long term reporting on that because he got personally involved in it. So it may have gotten lost in the noise with so many other actresses coming forward with stories of how he killed their careers or cancelled their shows: Cybill Shepard, Ileana Douglas, and of course his vendetta against Janet Jackson.

I find it interesting that CBS made all these promises and still they were hanging on to all the problematic showrunners well after that audit.  The MacGyver showrunner, the All Rise showrunner etc.  Whitney Davis an exec at CBS penned an essay -- again in the aftermath of the internal investigation  -- detailing the misogyny and racism rampant and it was met with shrugs, Sharon Osbourne's well documented shenanigans.  The rot goes deep there.

[Guest]

 

39 minutes ago, Irlandesa said:

It was big news and covered in the main stream media but it was also a fast moving story.  We didn't have months and months and months of stories coming out about it.

It seems that there are now many levels to big news stories and that it has to become a really massive news story before a significant portion of the population actually knows anything about it. Being covered by mainstream news really isn’t enough now to hit critical mass. 

[Ms Blue Jay]

I've began taking notice of movies where female nudity (I'm talking every single part) is shown but the camerapeople are doing their damndest to hide the male nudity.  It happens a lot. 

(I also take notice of what I call the female gaze, which is sometimes female directors but often male directors too who actually show male nudity instead or more than female. I'm sure there's a better term for it but not sure what it is.  Feminist or subversive I guess.)

I watched The Last Picture Show (1971) and I was really enjoying the movie up until a party scene where women were shown completely naked and the director acted like he was absolutely killing himself to make sure no private male parts were shown.  It would be laughable if it wasn't so horrifying.  I also saw Modern Romance (1981) where the main woman was shown completely nude (every single part) but of course director/writer/star Albert Brooks doesn't have to show anything.

My point is just that for so long this has been accepted in incredibly mainstream Hollywood movies.  Female body parts are taken for granted as normal parts of a movie whereas it would be shocking and scandalous if a man's was shown and the rating for the movie would change.

[Ms Blue Jay]

On 5/21/2021 at 4:49 PM, BetterButter said:

Danny Masterson Ordered to Stand Trial on Rape Charges

This disgusting pig is posting Instagram shots of him outside the courtroom for attention.  Fuck him to hell.

7 hours ago, Dani said:

Most of them have no clue about the behind the scenes drama. 

I don't believe that at all.  If you like a show or its star, you Google those things, and this news comes up immediately.  Also, I don't believe "people in Canada" have no knowledge of this.  My senior mother and I are Canadian and we know all about it and talk about it extensively.  My parents are retired, a big part of their daily life is TV and reading about it.

Edited May 23, 2021 by Ms Blue Jay

[Zella]

18 minutes ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

If you like a show or its star, you Google those things,

Not if you never Google anything about things you like. My grandmother has basically used Google when she is comparison shopping. I'm not sure it would ever even occur to her to Google a TV show she watches or that she ever realizes there is news worth looking for regarding a TV show. She's not a stupid or ill-informed person. It's just something that she would never even think of. My grandfather doesn't even know how to turn on a computer, so he's obviously not going to be googling either. I think there are more people out there who function this way than those of us who are actively online even imagine. 

Edited May 23, 2021 by Zella

[biakbiak]

25 minutes ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

all.  If you like a show or its star, you Google those things, and this news comes up immediately. 

I know tons of people of all ages who in fact don’t do that about television, movies, music or books. They like what is presented to them but don’t care to dive deeper and they wouldn’t think to google information about those things (my sister occasionally googles why a show is preempted but usually relies on me telling her anything I know about shows she watches that I think she would find interesting), it’s just not how everyone chooses to engage with it and I think that’s especially true for tv where a lot of people watch more passively, particularly if they watch live. 

Edited May 23, 2021 by biakbiak

[Ms Blue Jay]

There are also a lot of people online who admit to knowing all about the "backstage drama" and love the show and its star anyway.  So the viewers just aren't the people ignorant about it, it's also people who know all about it and just don't value not supporting the show because of it.

[biakbiak]

6 minutes ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

There are also a lot of people online who admit to knowing all about the "backstage drama" and love the show and its star anyway.  So the viewers just aren't the people ignorant about it, it's also people who know all about it and just don't value not supporting the show because of it.

Of course there are but I don’t think it’s the vast majority of the audience and is also a lot larger depending on the type of show and it’s target audience. I am not suggesting this website represents all discussion of Bull on the internet but there are currently only 129 posts in the media thread that was started 4 years ago! 

Edited May 23, 2021 by biakbiak

[Ms Blue Jay]

Personally if my parents were watching the show and had no clue about the issue I would tell them immediately.  At least I would want them to have all the information.  I don't have grandparents anymore, so I guess that would be a little different, I don't know.

Edited May 23, 2021 by Ms Blue Jay

[Irlandesa]

My sister is younger than I am and I will still be the one telling her tidbits about the shows she likes to watch.

It makes me feel a little weird in real life--as if, of all the things I know--it's this strange awareness of TV news as opposed to what the weather will be like tomorrow. Whereas here, knowing all these things about shows I don't even watch is not considered unusual. 

There are a lot of people who, even if they heard something, must think nothing came of it because the show is still on the air.  After all, if something really did happen, they would have taken the show off the air--right?  LOL!

 

Edited May 23, 2021 by Irlandesa

[biakbiak]

23 minutes ago, Irlandesa said:

It makes me feel a little weird in real life-

One of the bonuses of not leaving the house for a year and a half is that I haven’t dropped a ton of information about a show in a conversation only for look of confusion on the person’s face when it’s revealed that I don’t in fact watch that show! 

Edited May 23, 2021 by biakbiak

[aradia22]

Quote

My point is just that for so long this has been accepted in incredibly mainstream Hollywood movies.  Female body parts are taken for granted as normal parts of a movie whereas it would be shocking and scandalous if a man's was shown and the rating for the movie would change.

I think there are two issues here. There is the MPAA issue and the direction (and other creatives, executives, etc.) issue. One is easier... stop relying on the MPAA for ratings. The other is harder to unpack. 

[Zella]

10 minutes ago, aradia22 said:

I think there are two issues here. There is the MPAA issue and the direction (and other creatives, executives, etc.) issue. One is easier... stop relying on the MPAA for ratings. The other is harder to unpack. 

True but MPAA doesn't affect TV, right? So, that's not accounting for the disparity in, say, HBO shows, which often pride themselves on pushing boundaries but also still feature a huge difference in female versus male nudity. 

[Ms Blue Jay]

What does "stop relying on the MPAA for ratings" mean?  If they decide how movies are rated, that affects what adults, young adults, and children see.  So how do you "stop relying" on them.  Female parts being shown in movies shouldn't lead to a different rating than male parts being shown.  The sexism permeates through every aspect of Hollywood and that's just one of them.

Directors have spoken about how ratings board tried to give them higher ratings because of male nudity and they had to argue and protest against it.  MPAA is hiding male nudity from people but showing female nudity to people.  

I just saw Solaris (2002) and there's a lot of George Clooney backside.  (No female nudity at all). 

Quote

Rating[edit]

A few weeks prior to the film's release, in early November 2002, the Motion Picture Association of America assigned the film an R rating primarily due to two scenes that depicted Clooney's naked backside.[14] This caused an outburst among filmmakers against the MPAA and Directors Guild of America, and Soderbergh appealed, stating that similar content had been broadcast on network television. Twelve days prior to the film's release, an appeals board overturned the R-rating for a PG-13 rating.[15]

If it was a woman's ass, there'd probably be no issue.  That's systemic sexism and it is a problem.

Edited May 23, 2021 by Ms Blue Jay

[biakbiak]

29 minutes ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

What does "stop relying on the MPAA for ratings" mean? 

Stop using their ratings. They aren’t a government agency or anything, they are a trade association of the movie studios and Netflix. They only have power because the studios want it that way so movie chains abide by their ratings so that they will continue to get films but there is no reason that they have to do that other than their agreement with the MPAA.

Its old (2006) but the issues highlighted in the documentary, This Film is Not Yet Rated, about the problems with the MPAA and the rating system are still valid.

Lots of places now rate movies for content for children that I know parents find a lot more useful than MPAA ratings.

Edited May 23, 2021 by biakbiak

[Cherpumple]

1 hour ago, biakbiak said:

Its old (2006) but the issues highlighted in the documentary, This Film is Not Yet Rated, about the problems with the MPAA and the rating system are still valid.

That documentary is great, but maddening. It's beyond frustrating that such a sexist, arbitrary, and secretive group has so much sway over how we've been conditioned to think about the relative "taboo-ness" of various content (namely, sex, violence, and language).

[merylinkid]

6 hours ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

  Female parts being shown in movies shouldn't lead to a different rating than male parts being shown.  The sexism permeates through every aspect of Hollywood and that's just one of them.

that's the problem.   If you are going to rate a movie higher due to nudity, then ALL nudity is equal.   

Going further back to who follows Hollywood news if not for this very thread, I would have thought Bull was cancelled back when the news about Weatherly first came out.   Imagine my surprise its still on the air.   And I FOLLOW Hollywood news.   to presume folks who aren't avid consumer of enterntainment news would know this stuff and turn off the show is overestimating people's desire to seek out such news.   They just don't do it.   They watch a show because they enjoy it.   Period.   They have no desire to seek out more information.   They like the couch they have, they have no more desire to seek out more information about like where the fabric was produced and whether it was sustainably made or not.   Most people do not do deep dives on everything they like in their lives.   

[WinnieWinkle]

9 hours ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

I don't believe that at all.  If you like a show or its star, you Google those things, and this news comes up immediately.  Also, I don't believe "people in Canada" have no knowledge of this.  My senior mother and I are Canadian and we know all about it and talk about it extensively.  My parents are retired, a big part of their daily life is TV and reading about it.

I probably would if I liked a show but my husband definitely would not.  He has very little interest in popular culture - or certainly not much, he does know The Beatles broke up - but as to googling the names of TV actors or TV shows he likes?  I don't think that would ever cross his mind as something he would want to do.

[ifionlyknew]

I don't do deep dives on actors on shows I like to watch.   However if I read or hear a news story about an actor that is deal breaker for me I quickly turn my back on that actor's projects

Once I found out things about Patricia Heaton I never watched Everyone Loves Raymond again.