| | Weinstein’s Firing Is Not Enough For Rose McGowan, She’s Naming Names
Posted at 5:33 pm on October 9, 2017 by Jim Jamitis
 rose mcgowan
?@rosemcgowan
Women fight on. And to the men out there, stand up. We need you as allies. #bebrave
2:29 PM - Oct 5, 2017
People say politics is showbiz for the ugly. Whether or not that’s true, Hollywood and Washington, D.C. certainly share many cultural similarities. The lust for fame and the lust for power both make people ignore a lot of disgusting behavior on the part of others who might be a rung on the ladder they’re climbing. And once it reaches its apogee, fame or power both give some people the idea that they have license to do with lesser people whatever they wish.
Either way, the overlords of either city have no business preaching and moralizing to anyone. Whether you’re an apologist for guys like Weinstein or Trump or either of the Clintons, you’re still an enabler of bad people. Same sh*t different cesspool.
rose mcgowan
?@rosemcgowan
Robert Weinstein, Lance Maerov, Richard Koenigsberg and Tarak Ben Ammar - you do not get to hide #RESIGN #rosearmyhttps://t.co/kpu3wy7qvI
1:21 PM - Oct 9, 2017
It seems that the only remedy in either city is a thorough housecleaning, and that seems exactly what actress/filmmaker Rose McGowan is demanding.
Rose McGowan on Sunday night spoke about the entire “bro nature” of Hollywood hours after it was announced that Harvey Weinstein had been fired from his own company.
His termination came days after the New York Times reported that the industry mogul had numerous claims of sexual harassment allegations leveled against him by multiple accusers.
In an interview with The Hollywood Reporter, McGowan said the old way Hollywood functioned in regard to the treatment of women is done.
“Men in Hollywood need to change ASAP,” McGowan told THR. “Hollywood’s power is dying because society has changed and grown, and yet Hollywood male behavior has not. It is so not a good look. In the way cooler than Hollywood world I live and work in, I am actually embarrassed to be associated with it.”
She added, “The men of Hollywood need to know they own no woman. The days of Entourage-like behavior and thinking is as dated as your largely bro nature.”
With Weinstein out, McGowan said the next step was crystal clear, in her mind.
“I’m calling on the board to resign effective immediately,” she said. “And for other men to stop other men when they are being disgusting.”
I agree men should stop other men from being disgusting but I don’t think it falls only to men to do that. People like Weinstein only get away with their perversions for as long as they do because a lot of people of both sexes decide that their self respect is a fair price to pay for career advancement. If everyone valued their integrity as much as their dreams of stardom, Weinstein would probably be in jail or knocking on doors to tell his new neighbors that they live on the same street as a sex offender. That’s not to blame victims for Weinstein’s actions. It’s just a fact that we tend to get more of whatever bad behaviors we decide to tolerate.
It’s the same in Washington, whether it’s Hillary Clinton letting herself be played for a fool by her tomcat husband just so she wouldn’t lose the benefit of riding his coattails or consultants and pundits willing to do or say anything about any politician no matter how skeevy just to rise one more rung up the D.C. ladder or get their chance at being Fox News Famous. We don’t create our own monsters but we do very often feed and water them.
McGowan’s naming names on Twitter as well and going after those who she believes enabled Weinstein’s reign of terror.
View image on Twitter
rose mcgowan
?@rosemcgowan
Hey @mattdamon what’s it like to be a spineless profiteer who stays silent?
2:02 PM - Oct 9, 2017
rose mcgowan
?@rosemcgowan
Ben Affleck Casey Affleck, how’s your morning boys?
3:17 PM - Oct 9, 2017
She’s referring to allegations that actor Matt Damon and others helped quash the Weinstein story 10 years ago, enabling another whole decade of Weinstein’s behavior.Andrea Ruth wrote about here at RedState.
Something tells me there may be plenty of aftershocks to the Weinstein shakeup.
https://www.redstate.com/jimjamitis/2017/10/09/weinsteins-firing-not-enough-rose-mcgowan-shes-naming-names/
Could The New York Times Have Broken The Weinstein Story Over A Decade Ago?
Posted at 8:36 pm on October 9, 2017 by Andrea Ruth
Since The New York Times ran their bombshell story about Harvey Weinstein’s decades of sexual harassment, many have questioned why the story took so long to come out.
The Wrap’s Sharon Waxman, a former Times reporter, shed some light on the matter, recounting a period in her career when she took on a story involving rumors surrounding Weinstein and possible sexual harassment.
In 2004, I was still a fairly new reporter at The New York Times when I got the green light to look into oft-repeated allegations of sexual misconduct by Weinstein. It was believed that many occurred in Europe during festivals and other business trips there.
Waxman then traveled to Rome and London where she learned about two people who had first-hand knowledge of Weinstein’s indiscretions overseas.
One a procurer who supplied Weinstein with women and the other, a woman who had received a payout after an “unwanted sexual encounter.”
The story Waxman wrote for the Times never ran.
Someone must’ve been made aware the story existed because Waxman writes (emphasis added),
After intense pressure from Weinstein, which included having Matt Damon and Russell Crowe call me directly to vouch for Lombardo and unknown discussions well above my head at the Times, the story was gutted.
So, one of the reasons Weinstein was allowed to continue to behave in the way that now lost him his job in 2017, would’ve been well-known if not for Hollywood not only turning a blind eye but actively coming to his defense.
This is probably why Weinstein thought his letter to Hollywood moguls shortly before his firing, begging them to write to the board of The Weinstein Company supporting him taking a leave of absence and against his firing, would work.
Waxman goes on to explain how her editor responded when she asked why the story was edited down.
The story was stripped of any reference to sexual favors or coercion and buried on the inside of the Culture section, an obscure story about Miramax firing an Italian executive. Who cared?
The Times’ then-culture editor Jon Landman, now an editor-at-large for Bloomberg, thought the story was unimportant, asking me why it mattered.
“He’s not a publicly elected official,” he told me. I explained, to no avail, that a public company would certainly have a problem with a procurer on the payroll for hundreds of thousands of dollars. At the time, Disney told me they had no idea Lombardo existed.
How a Times editor could not see why a story about an executive as powerful as Weinstein mistreating women wasn’t a story, or that he wouldn’t use his power as leverage over women and their careers, is beyond me.
Waxman rightly questions the bravery or heroism being given to the Times now when they were one of Weinstein’s enablers.
The Times is as responsible for Weinstein’s continued harassment of women as it is for his firing from The Weinstein Company. Credit where credit is due, but it’s worth remembering their part in enabling the man.
https://www.redstate.com/prevaila/2017/10/09/new-york-times-broken-weinstein-story-decade-ago/
|
|
