Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
saoirse

NCIS In The Media

Recommended Posts

On 5/7/2018 at 1:13 PM, GHScorpiosRule said:

Pauley is being very ambivalent about Abby's Fate.

But this really has me rolling my eyes:

Can you say: Clip show?

At this point, I'd just assume we get it over with....whatever "it" turns out to be.  We can't get back what I want anyway---the months and months of wasted time and missing scenes that could have been used throughout the season to build up a send-off for Abby...moments with Gibbs, moments with McGee, a few with Ducky, and heck maybe even a few phone calls (one-sided) where Abby could have been talking to Tony.  Instead, we got none of that...just this awkward parade of everyone BUT Gibbs now coming to see Abby in the lab.  As sad as tonight might be, I think what's even sadder is how we ended up here and that a very popular dynamic is now non-existent.

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post

I’m sorry, but some of these actors are really petty! Neither one of them could put aside their differences for one show? One scene? Blech. 

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, Runningwild said:

I’m sorry, but some of these actors are really petty! Neither one of them could put aside their differences for one show? One scene? Blech. 

Get out of my head! I just posted this in the episode thread!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
38 minutes ago, Runningwild said:

I’m sorry, but some of these actors are really petty! Neither one of them could put aside their differences for one show? One scene? Blech. 

What I'm struggling with is that whatever this feud, disagreement , or whatever it is, this situation has now led to the creation of canon.  I could be watching Season 3, 4, or whatever, and now I know that the loving relationship that exists is going to turn into one where the characters no longer SPEAK to each other!  Say what?!  This mess has screwed up 15 years of backstory.  Abby stands across the street from Gibbs' house?!  No way, no how, but we're now stuck with it forever!  Blech!  Blech!  and double Blech!

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post

Isn't it interesting that with the exception of Weatherly, the characters that left the show were all women?  Kate, Ziva, Jenny and now Abby.  Any correlation?  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, KLovestoShop said:

Isn't it interesting that with the exception of Weatherly, the characters that left the show were all women?  Kate, Ziva, Jenny and now Abby.  Any correlation?  

My two cents. The actress who played Kate basically said is was too much for her. Being a cop show does mean there will be physical acting and probably be required to at least look fit in clothes. The actress who played Jenny had at least one bout with cancer so I can see her tiring.  The actresses who played Ziva and Abby probably got tired of routine and wanted to do other things before they were totally type cast as a cop show actor as much as anything. Ironically Weatherly left a year after a dui. I think he also had a contract dispute a few years earlier but he too didn't want to type cast.

People leave jobs or assignments everyday in the real working world. I never hold it against someone for trying different things, applying for promotions and transfers which many frown on in the work place. Actors are like most people, most wind up working for pay, not love of the job. They might say it or think it but most work to live, not live to work.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

8 hours ago, Ohmo said:

I know that the loving relationship that exists is going to turn into one where the characters no longer SPEAK to each other!

That's not true.  The characters do speak to each other.  The characters aren't even remotely mad at one another.  We just don't see their interactions.

Share this post


Link to post

Duane is right- they never did much with his character until the last few episodes. After they knew he was leaving. Many of us wondered why the character was even there as he didn’t do anything really. 

Share this post


Link to post

so sad they got rid of Duane Henry, so many options for his character.  Still don't understand how Bishop is still on.  Plus, she was a computer geek and now kicks in doors???

 

Really didn't like this episode.  Not for the reasons stated.  thought acting was very bad.  The story was obvious if you saw last weeks episode.  The flashbacks weren't the bets of the series. the characters  they brought on, weren't the best from the past.  Just a bad episode all together.  Also, if there is a feud between MH and PP, they both looked like unprofessional immature kids.  Your job is your job.  Do what you are supposed to  do or go to something else.  Even if they did want to part ways, there were other ways than to drag out this season.

Hope the writers and powers that be can come up with a shot of adrenaline for this show

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

At least Stana Katic & Nathan Fillion still appeared together in scenes, and their dislike of each other was huge.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post

This feud has ruined the show for me. Now I know how unprofessional the actors are, and I won't see anything else if I watch even the earlier episodes I [used to] love. ANd I sure as heck won't be watching either MH or PP in anything else they do.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

RAINSMOM, I blame MH.  He had enough power and clout to have someone convince PP to be in a scene with her if he wanted it to happen.  He chose not to so he didn't want to.  I haven't watched this show since the end of season seven (I loathed Ziva) but I tuned in for MW's exit and PP's.  This does put such a damper on the earlier closeness PP and MH's characters had shared.  What a bummer.

 

Oh, almost forgot, I came here to say it's too late for PP or MW to worry about getting typecast.

Edited by Goldmoon
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, MissLucas said:

Damage control and blame-shifting are underway.

I don't believe anything anonymous sources say.  I mean the dog thing is pretty well established.  But, the details could be anything.  As far as I know, neither Pauley Perette, nor Mark Harmon, have said anything directly to the press.  And, I respect them both for that. They appear to be doing their best to keep their own private business private.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Katy M said:

I don't believe anything anonymous sources say.  I mean the dog thing is pretty well established.  But, the details could be anything.  As far as I know, neither Pauley Perette, nor Mark Harmon, have said anything directly to the press.  And, I respect them both for that. They appear to be doing their best to keep their own private business private.

Somebody (or several somebodies) decided that the 2 of them would not be filming any scenes together. Whether it was Harmon, PP, producers, a combination, or whoever... THEY brought this into the public eye. I can respect MH and PP for not talking smack about the other to the press, but clearly the fans noticed the change,so for the show and everyone associated with it to continue to stick their fingers in their ears while singing "lalalalalalahappybirthdaytomela" is silly. Unless they expect the show to be ending soon or undergoing a major overhaul of cast and theme (spin-off by bringing in new cast and direction) they're going to need to address it. Everyone's talking about it. Viewers are tuning out.

Feuds are almost always the responsibility of all parties and not just one. The blame may not be 50/50, but it's usually shared to SOME extent. The show should make a statement. SOMEONE should make a statement.

I'd be ok if MH & PP issued a JOINT statement saying something along the lines of "Due to private conflicts on set, we decided that it was best for us to maintain separate shooting schedules. We apologize to the fans for any disruption this may have caused or if it affected enjoyment of our show. In retrospect, perhaps it was not handled as well as it could have been. We and everyone associated with the show wish each other and the NCIS team and fans all the best in the future and we are grateful for the opportunities NCIS have given us all"

See? That's not so hard? I didn't even have to think that much about it, and I'm not a professional spokesperson for anything!

Edited by slothgirl
  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post

Well, that is a majorly passive-aggressive  "refusal to go low".  Yeah, I'm not going low but its not my fault and the powerful are picking on me now.  She has now insured that this story will go on.  

yet another tweet  image.thumb.png.cccd3bab41c5abd90d208c127d46eb1d.png

Edited by pally
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

So is she implying that Mark Harmon is threatening her life? To keep silent?

 I’m confused. In the article it stated that after the dog bit the crew member, Harmon left it at home. Until one day when he didn’t have anyone to look after it, brought it to set but kept it in his airstream. But then the article goes on to say that Perrette was pissed because he refused to keep the dog at home, and it made it sound that Harmon decided to bring the dog back after that one day.

So now anonymous sources feel comfortable in speaking out? 

Like I’ve said before, actors who have been known to hate each other managed to do their jobs. It’s very disappointing because it’s not as if these two hardly knew each other. They’ve been working together for over 15 years. And from interviews, they were also friends, so this whole fakakta mess has tainted this season for me. I can easily ignore everything that went down when I rewatch the early seasons.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

And she seems to be implying she was physically assaulted multiple times on set.  She apparently doesn't care that she is implicating everyone she worked with some pretty nasty stuff.  There is a lot more to this story and something tells me that Pauley isn't nearly as innocent as she is trying to portray herself

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, pally said:

And she seems to be implying she was physically assaulted multiple times on set.

How does 'Boren's disappearance as a character support this? or not?  

Did I read that Diane Neal publicly complained about a lack of safe practices during shooting scenes and that got her not invited back? This was IIRC discussed after Ziva left. 

Share this post


Link to post

Wow...Pauley....just wow......I noticed in her "Abby Leaves" interviews that she barely mentioned the cast or crew of NCIS..just the fans.....I do worry that there may be a NDA in her contract barring her from talking about what really happened.

I can buy that Harmon was a bit of a control freak about what he could and could not do but to hint at more than that? Also I thought Diane Neal was talking about unsafe conditions at NCIS: New Orleans...She barely was on NCIS:Original.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

4 hours ago, stonehaven said:

Wow...Pauley....just wow......I noticed in her "Abby Leaves" interviews that she barely mentioned the cast or crew of NCIS..just the fans.....I do worry that there may be a NDA in her contract barring her from talking about what really happened.

I can buy that Harmon was a bit of a control freak about what he could and could not do but to hint at more than that? Also I thought Diane Neal was talking about unsafe conditions at NCIS: New Orleans...She barely was on NCIS:Original.

I had no idea it was a pit bull until I read E! article! I wouldn't be happy, but I also wouldn't make a Federal case out of it! It makes sense that if anything happened Harmon and the producers would be in serious trouble! Harmon's a senior citizen by now for Gawd-sake! I was going to say "respect your elders," but PP is no spring chicken approaching 50 from what the article says! I had no idea with her juvenile persona portrayal ;-)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, enoughcats said:

How does 'Boren's disappearance as a character support this? or not?  

Did I read that Diane Neal publicly complained about a lack of safe practices during shooting scenes and that got her not invited back? This was IIRC discussed after Ziva left. 

Well, Diane Neal complained on Twitter instead of going to the powers that be and voicing her concern.  She even admitted she handled it all wrong.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Crimes? Assaults? WTF? And she is "protecting her crew" Who's her crew? 

Can an NDA really prevent you from reporting a crime, especially when you are the victim? And why woud anyone agree to the NDA unless they are getting something in return?

In another tweet from last year, she talked about never meeting Harvey Weinstein but being bullied by a powerful man at work. Did Glasburg keep someone in line and without him things are worse? (the text of that tweet is at the bottom of the article linked below)

I wonder if the regression of Abby's character to near juvenile mannerisms was something the actress didn't want, but some "powerful man" insisted on the short little-goth-girl skirts, the strange little "hoppy" walk, and the high voice.

I agree that her innuendo is just as bad as any false rumors being spread about her... maybe worse. In the articles, she's accused of becoming a diva on set and refusing to hear MH out on why he had to bring the dog back. She's accusing an unamed person (but who would we think it is other than Harmon?) of CRIMES, assault, whatever...

This is gonna get uglier, I'm sure

http://canoe.com/entertainment/celebrity/there-is-a-machine-keeping-me-silent-pauley-perrette-tweets-cryptic-messages-amid-drama-of-quitting-ncis

Edited by slothgirl
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎5‎/‎9‎/‎2018 at 5:50 AM, Ohmo said:

NCIS: How Did Pauley Perrette's Abby Exit Series? Plus, Co-Star Describes Heroic Death as 'A Dream Come True'

This includes a Q and A with Duane Henry.  Apparently, he was also looking to do other things.  He talks about being Glasberg's guy, and how he thinks Gary's death affected what was to originally be for his character.

Isn't that ridiculous - you would think that Glasberg would have let the writers in on the plan for Clayton.  Also, to honor Glasberg, why not develop the last character he brought on???

I'm still just mad.  I really liked Clayton.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

Well, this is letting me hold on by my fingernails to my belief that MH wasn't a COMPLETE ass. If the article is somewhat true, at least, and he was trying his best to make it safe for everyone, that I can buy. (Although, what are the laws in California re: dog bite? I think in New York the dog would be euthanized after a bite that resulted in stitches. unless the crew member was provoking it or something, which i doubt. Again - only think in NY - don't know law.)

Oh Pauley. Just keep your mouth shut.

I'm with @slothgirl - they are going to HAVE to address it now. Now regular TV media will be asking about it at the upfronts - TVLine, TVInsider, etc.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

26 minutes ago, betsyboo said:

Well, this is letting me hold on by my fingernails to my belief that MH wasn't a COMPLETE ass. If the article is somewhat true, at least, and he was trying his best to make it safe for everyone, that I can buy.

Eh. I'm skeptical of the 'no other options' claim; while daycare, as some suggested, would likely not be feasible (many have breed-specific policies that exclude pitts, and still more would refuse to admit a confirmed biter), there are professional pet-sitters who will visit your dog every few hours (or stay the whole time if you pay them enough) to give your dog attention and either walks or exercise in a fenced-in yard. If the rest of us working schlubs can make such arrangements when we have to leave our dogs too long, I'm pretty sure MH could. Would probably be kinder to the dog than cooping him up in a trailer 'the majority of the time' for '18-19 hours', for that matter.

(Of course, mileage may vary; different dogs have different energy requirements, and his might be perfectly content to laze around the trailer.)

Not that PP's behavior is great according to the article either (although I agree with above posters that it merits skepticism); I wouldn't have pegged her for being anti-pitt, given past actions. Granted, it's unfortunately true that even some big 'dog lovers' can still breed-discriminate.

Also, is all this reminding anyone ironically of the plot of the much-reviled Dog Tags? One co-worker exposes another to a dog they fear will continue to be aggressive...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, Emma9 said:

Eh. I'm skeptical of the 'no other options' claim; while daycare, as some suggested, would likely not be feasible (many have breed-specific policies that exclude pitts, and still more would refuse to admit a confirmed biter), there are professional pet-sitters who will visit your dog every few hours (or stay the whole time if you pay them enough) to give your dog attention and either walks or exercise in a fenced-in yard. If the rest of us working schlubs can make such arrangements when we have to leave our dogs too long, I'm pretty sure MH could. Would probably be kinder to the dog than cooping him up in a trailer 'the majority of the time' for '18-19 hours', for that matter.

From what I understood from the article, that was a one day thing, and it seemed as if his regular dog sitter was unavailable. Perhaps a last minute family emergency or something.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, Emma9 said:

 

Also, is all this reminding anyone ironically of the plot of the much-reviled Dog Tags? One co-worker exposes another to a dog they fear will continue to be aggressive...

I KNOW! That's all I've been able to think of throughout this. I hate that episode and deliberately skip it whenever we re-watch because I hated how jerky Abby was to McGee and how the show tried to play it off at a big joke at McGee's expense. I know that Pauley was more than likely just reading the script she was given and probably none of that ep was her call but I still find it ironic that *she's* now the one complaining about a dog.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

If MH's dog already had a registered bite he may not have wanted to risk another by having someone else watch it. 

Could dog bites be  the physical assaults PP is referring to in the tweets?  I do think that whoever released the latest "behind the scenes" pro MH gossip kind of set this off.  It's all very unfortunate.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

This is a crazy story and there is probably more it, but Harmon comes off as an entitled shit despite the attempts to rationalize his behavior. He couldn't find someone to care for his dog for a day so he had to bring it to work where it had attacked a member of a crew. Seriously? Bullshit. This man is a multimillionaire. He could have hired someone, taken it to the vet for the day, or secured the dog in one of the many rooms in his mansion/house. Then there is CBS. It allows an aggressive dog to be brought to the workplace AFTER it bit one of its employees. Talk about setting the stage for an unnecessary multimillion lawsuit to cater to an actor's bad judgment. The rich really are different.

Edited by SimoneS
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

He may be a multimillionaire, but he's also human, and circumstances could have forced him to bring the dog for a day. And yes, this is CBS, and if it allowed him to bring the dog after the incident, their legal team must have felt reasonably confident that they were *not* setting the stage for a multimillion dollar lawsuit.

As mentioned, it's a crazy story and there is probably (undoubtedly) more to it. I'm mostly bummed because I generally like the actors and their characters, and this is harshing my enjoyment of the show.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

It's all weird because first of all, Pauley is a known dog lover.  She donates a lot to pet charities.  So I guess I find it strange that she wouldn't be sympathetic to what was going on with the dog, as well as, being sympathetic to the crew member who was bit.

Second, she was assaulted by her ex and by that homeless man.  She fought them off physically and has a restraining order on the one.  How could someone who wouldn't let herself be a victim then allow herself to be victimized for years at her workplace?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Granted, MH is human, however he is in a much better position to find alternate care for his own damn dog for one day. Where was his family? His, wife, Pam? Relatives? Kids? An assistant, for crying out loud. Why does the dog need to have someone around for 18-19 hours? Plenty of regular people leave their dogs at home when they go to work for the day, or ask someone to check on them, let them outside or whatever, if they're gonna be gone longer than 8-9 hours. If this story is true, while I side eye PP, I have to wonder why MH had no other alternative than bringing a dog, who had already bitten someone on set, back to scene of the crime. 

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/14/2018 at 7:02 PM, ForReal said:

He may be a multimillionaire, but he's also human, and circumstances could have forced him to bring the dog for a day. And yes, this is CBS, and if it allowed him to bring the dog after the incident, their legal team must have felt reasonably confident that they were *not* setting the stage for a multimillion dollar lawsuit.

Despite your attempts to rationalize Harmon's behavior, bottomline he is a bad dog owner and an entitled ass being indulged by CBS. No one with experience with an aggressive and dangerous dog would ever feel confident so as to behave like Harmon. The dog has already bitten and severely injured a human being. If Harmon really loved and cared about his dog, he would keep it secured to avoid any recurrence of the behavior. He certainly wouldn't have taken it back onto the set. His negligent actions really irk me as a dog lover. Not only is he is putting other people in danger from the dog, he is putting dog's life in jeopardy from the authorities who could put it down if it continues to bite people.  

Edited by SimoneS
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

We don't know if the dog story is true any more than we know if Pauley's claims are true.  What she needs to do is to stop playing games and make her accusations public.  If she was assaulted, then file a police report.  That way her story can be properly evaluated.  This little game she is playing is childish and colors all her co-workers with the same brush which doesn't help them as she claims.  What we do know is that for a 15-year-old show, there haven't been any rumors of a toxic workplace.  They have had a pretty stable cast and crew with ALL of the stars including Pauley signing multiple contracts.  Now that just might mean that they were really good at keeping things quiet.  Maybe we'll find out that Gary Glassberg had iron glove control and the wheels started falling off with his death.  Maybe it is simply 15 years of working closely together and everyone is ready for the divorce.  Or maybe it is another in a long line of Pauley Perrette's accusations of abuse from people in her life.  But her passive-aggressive middle of the night tweeting is not the way to go about making accusations

  • Like 16

Share this post


Link to post

I suspect like with many interpersonal conflicts, there is blame on both sides and both sides are eager to appear blameless to observers.   What is really unfortunate is the passive/aggressive gossipy sniping playing out in the electronic media.  "PP is crazy."  "MH is a dangerous egomaniac."  I believe there probably is a little something to both.  PP strikes me as a wee bit unbalanced sometimes, and with her history I can see where she has reason to be and she probably has triggers.  As others have said, MH is human and he's had a lot of years where his show has been #1, so it would be really easy for him to grow a big head.  It is just too bad that this conflict couldn't have been resolved cleanly and without all this ridiculousness of separate scenes, farewells through passing notes and sign language.  Right now, PP's tweets are looking a big unhinged, but it does make me worried that in this day and age of "Me Too" there really is something to her claims. 

 

The truth, as always, lies somewhere in between the two extremes.  It may not be exactly in the middle, there may be more truth to one side or the other, but all this coy innuendo isn't serving anybody.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, scorpio1031 said:

Second, she was assaulted by her ex and by that homeless man.  She fought them off physically and has a restraining order on the one.  How could someone who wouldn't let herself be a victim then allow herself to be victimized for years at her workplace?

No one allows themselves to be victimized?

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

22 minutes ago, slf said:

No one allows themselves to be victimized?

If the assaults have gone on like she claims, then she's allowing it instead of fighting back like she has before.  That's why I'm saying it's all just weird.

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, scorpio1031 said:

If the assaults have gone on like she claims, then she's allowing it instead of fighting back like she has before.  That's why I'm saying it's all just weird.

Lovely. Let's see, perhaps it was someone very powerful, perhaps it was someone she trusted, perhaps after years of abuse she's internalized some issues, perhaps she was threatened and now that she's no longer part of the show she's beginning to feel safer and more confident, perhaps she froze out of fear, etc. I'm not seeing anything "weird" so much as "tragic"; tragic that she's had to fight back against assaults, tragic that she was repeatedly hurt. And a victim never "allows" themselves to be assaulted, it doesn't matter if they didn't fight back.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, slf said:

Lovely. Let's see, perhaps it was someone very powerful, perhaps it was someone she trusted, perhaps after years of abuse she's internalized some issues, perhaps she was threatened and now that she's no longer part of the show she's beginning to feel safer and more confident, perhaps she froze out of fear, etc. I'm not seeing anything "weird" so much as "tragic"; tragic that she's had to fight back against assaults, tragic that she was repeatedly hurt. And a victim never "allows" themselves to be assaulted, it doesn't matter if they didn't fight back.

A victim doesn't allow themselves to be assaulted. BUT... they do return to the place or person where the assaults happen, knowing that more assaults will likely occur.

That's not a judgement or victim blaming; it's just the truth of what so often happens. There may be many legitimate reasons why the victim does that, but for PP to continue to work on the series if she had been repeatedly assaulted, doesn't make much sense to those of us who have never been in the situation. Many women have tolerated ill-treatment because they were not in a position to leave an abuser for various reasons. What kept PP there "against her will" so to speak? After so many years on the show, even if she didn't want to lose the income, she could probably AFFORD to. 

On the other hand, MH seems to have a talent for creating long-term feuds within his family, so maybe once he gets his back up, there's no reconcilliation possible. It might have nothing to do with his ego getting bigger on the #1 show. Maybe he's always been a grudge collector. 

Lots of maybes... we just don't know. But I really dislike PP's vague tweets. It casts doubt on many people about unspecified actions.

It also damages the credibility of other victims who are being up front and taking real risks to expose abusers.

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, slothgirl said:

A victim doesn't allow themselves to be assaulted.

Agreed.

9 minutes ago, slothgirl said:

It also damages the credibility of other victims who are being up front and taking real risks to expose abusers.

I don't see how, to be honest.

I hope that Pauley Perrette is getting the help and support she needs.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, slf said:

I don't see how, to be honest.

Because she is being vague and relying on innuendo to "report" crimes, knowing it damages the reputation of someone specific without naming that person or clarifying what that person did. We don't know that ANYTHING occurred. We don't know WHO did whatever was done, if anything was done. We don't know if there's more - or LESS - to the dog story. We only know rumor and tweets. 

Real people's reputations are at stake here, and I've got a problem with people's lives being destroyed by rumors, innuendo, and assumptions. There's a reason our justice system works as it does, and this isn't justice for anybody... not the implied accused, nor the alleged victim.

There are already people who don't believe victims when they accuse famous men because they are seen to be seeking fame, money, whatever. It's hard for victims to get people to believe them. Those are good reasons why someone may not want to come forward. But coming forward in this manner doesn't help the cause. It just raises doubts.

We had a case here of false accusations that received national attention when the accusations were made. The revelations that it was all made up made the work of real victims and prosecutors working on their behalf harder. It made the work of people trying to spread knowledge of racism and abuse harder. You may not agree, but vague accusations on Twitter can have the same effect.

Edited by slothgirl
  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
54 minutes ago, slothgirl said:

Because she is being vague and relying on innuendo to "report" crimes, knowing it damages the reputation of someone specific without naming that person or clarifying what that person did.

This makes no sense to me. How can the reputation of someone specific be damaged if she hasn't named anyone? 

Quote

There are already people who don't believe victims when they accuse famous men because they are seen to be seeking fame, money, whatever. It's hard for victims to get people to believe them.

No one says "well, you can't believe accusations" because a woman said she was assaulted but didn't name someone. That's absurd. People don't believe women because of misogyny, plain and simple. False accusations are very, very rare, after all; it can't possibly be because of the unreliability and untrustworthiness of women.

Edited by slf
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, slf said:

This makes no sense to me. How can the reputation of someone specific be damaged if she hasn't named anyone? 

I was with you until this somewhat disingenuous sentence. Pauley Perrette refusing to film scenes with Harmon makes it seem like there are serious issues there. Add abuse accusations and people are going to put two and two together.

Edited by steelyis
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size