The first response is always vengeance.
And while that is all well and good, there needs needs to be a dialogue, and a concerted effort to prevent these situations from occurring in the first place.
Vengeance may somehow address some of the immediate feelings, but it does little to break the repetitive negative cycle and that needs to be the goal.
1
This guy belongs to jail. This is very insulting when rich and powerful people like Clinton, Trump, O'Reilly, Ailes, and this Weinstein commit sexual harrasments and escape the consequences.
4
I was trying to figure out what sexual harassment was and why it was something attributed to powerful men. I started by clarifying the word power. Power is the ability to make someone do something they would prefer not to. Example: making a woman have sex with you when she would prefer not to. Then I clarified sexual harassment. It simply means unwanted sexual advances. What in the world does this mean? I mean men are supposed to make the first move. If they don’t and women desire something sexual, the women know how to provoke an advance. And if a man still doesn’t respond a woman might then consider even that to be sexual harassment. (And I wouldn’t blame her.) Okay. I've got power and sexual harassment. But I don’t see any connection between the two.
However, in my case it doesn’t matter for two reasons: First, I have absolutely no power. Second I can’t imagine a woman considering any sexual advances I might make (she should be so lucky) to be unwanted.
Amusing that he tries to absolve himself by comparing himself with Jay Z!
He would have done better saying "I'm just like the Green River Killer!"
Honestly, can anyone imagine a worse role model than Jay Z?
1
All of the pols are shocked. They’re racing headlong in the efforts to see who can be first to return at least some of the money Weinstein either gave them or procured for them. It’s really laughable. But what about the “ladies” who paid for access to stardom? Are they giving to charities their soiled gains?
2
"We just elected a POTUS who got caught sexually harassing a woman in the crudest terms. Caught red-handed. And still got elected."
I'll confess I was amazed that Trump got elected after the Access Hollywood tape came out. But even if he'd been in prison, voters could have elected him. Several politicians have been elected while sitting in a jail cell, Democrats and Republicans alike.
7
Ashley Judd? Pardon me for being skeptical.
AJ is credited, profusely, for "speaking out." She actually did just the opposite. For well over 20 years, she kept entirely silent about the horrible events she now "speaks out" against. During her 20+ years of silence, AJ acted in 2 or 3 HW movies. Did she just hold out and demand that HW evaluate her on her merits? Or did she give in? Who knows? She knows, and HW knows, but the rest of us can only guess.
I don't claim to know. All we DO know about AJ is that, despite being praised now for "speaking out," she (1) did NOT speak out, her utter silence arguably condemning other young women to the same treatment when "speaking out" might have spared them; and (2) got leading roles in multiple HW movies during her many years of silence. It's hard to draw any conclusions about #1 except very unfavorable consequences. As for #2, we'll never know, but one does wonder.
6
Not quite:
"If these allegations are true then he got what he deserved. But quite frankly I dont understand all the hoopla. So what ?"
Many leading roles in HW movies could have been played very well by a dozen or more actresses. If an actress was chosen on her merits, us movie-goers have no fair complaint. But if an actress was chosen because she was willing to sleep with the boss when other, more talented, actresses were not, all of us movie-goers have been hurt: We might have been able to see a movie in which a better leading actress was cast even though she didn't sleep with the boss.
1
If we can all always remember that each individual is someone's precious child, perhaps there would be less abuse in the world.
10
Frankly we have no idea of the facts in each circumstance. Sharon Stone boasted of her actions to “get ahead” . He’s being scapegoated for being crass.
5
Where"s Stephen Colbert give him a pass he's one of our own. This is what happens when you take sides now there will be no deals cut and the only winners are the attorneys.A deal does not mean you are guilty just that it is less hassle than wasting time fighting this nonsense well guess what the gloves are off and the fights will get real ugly.The closets will be opened.What a waste of time and money.
1
If these allegations are true then he got what he deserved. But quite frankly I dont understand all the hoopla. So what ? I tend to not pay a lot of attention when an industries internal issues become front page news. Like the award shows that are all about an internal celebration that very few people are in.
Mehhh.
3
But why now? Curiosity killed the cat, information made him fat and satisfaction brought him back', and I looked at an office telephone directory compiled a decade ago to see if Mr. Weinstein's number is listed. He would have been seeking economic advice at the time and the local florist probably has his number too.
I find all this more disappointing than shocking for some reason. Not only scandalous, etc. but highly political is this Hollywood matter. Political because apparently this Movie Mogul is a Liberal and the Democrats, with reason, are concerned about the coming General Elections. Who blew the whistle on this tycoon, and why didn't these assaulted women speak up when 'Sexual Harassment' become taboo in the 80s.
Wait, it's probably not that easy. You would need a powerful ally for starters. Questions would be asked such as why did you have dinner at his residential hotel. Why not, you would reply, I did notice that the waiter was winking at me and thought it was a bit odd...O, well 'The Harder They Fall', but once again the timing for all these revelations seems suspect, and when The House of Cads comes tumbling down, there is usually a lot of money to be found in these sordid affairs.
Harvey Weinstein may have been the crude, vulgar, barrel chested sexual predator everyone commenting on these pages says he was and is. But he was also something else. Mr. Weinstein was one of the most important forces for elevating the level of American civilization through films. The films he produced and imported are a testimony to a genius that is buried somewhere in that corpulent, graceless and sometimes brutal persona. Let us hope that the genius survives.
1
Fear not, Elliott.
This will blow over very soon. If HW just can't manage to leave the movie business -- for example, to focus on that foundation named after his mother -- he'll probably start his own movie production company, and nearly everyone who now vows never to see a movie he's had anything to do with will eagerly view every movie his new company makes. Reviewers will dutifully announce that they think the guy who made the movie is a terrible human being, but they'll insist his movie must be judged on its own merits. If he makes bad movies, he'll lose money. But if he makes good movies, he'll reap money and fame. And all of us will wonder about every female lead in his new movies. Why did he choose her, we'll wonder. Was she the best choice available to him, or did he choose her for some other reason?
1
As a liberal Democrat I make the following pledge: If Mr Trump is forced out of job in the next 72 hours like HW was I will never say a bad word about Trump again.
9
As an American I make to a pledge not to use the word stupid when AJ comes back to reality.
4
Seems to me Mr. Maerov and crew should not have needed the NYT and Ms. Bloom to "fan the flames" in order for HW to get the boot. We are talking decades of heinous behavior here. They were all his enablers. And why a male-only board? Pathetic.
9
You mean, women are just now discovering there's a "casting couch"?!!!
I just read an account how Mr. Weinstein called one woman a nasty anatomical name. Someone please call the DA.
Just wait till it gets out that gay producers and directors are hitting on male actors. Oh, my!
We certainly live in an innocent age.
9
Exactly. This is blown opportunistically out of proportion. A feeding frenzy. Uh how about evidence.
2
So funny how all of a sudden everyone comes forward.
I guess they made enough money off his company distributing their films.
8
I am shocked—shocked—to find that gambling is going on in here
3
Meryl Streep is being disingenuous to say the least! Everyone in Hollywood and beyond knew this! Sorry, Me Streep! You knew and you could have used your power to make this happen years ago!!!
14
Can it be that after years of social, political and climate change McLuhan's 15 minutes of fame has transmuted into 15 minutes of shame? American style fame--rotten, bullying, "powerful" males with egos off the charts.
6
The Times’s executive editor, Dean Baquet, responded to Ms. Waxman’s allegations.
“Mainly, she had an off-the-record account from one woman.”
Ms. Waxman had written:
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.
I traveled to Rome and tracked down the man who held the plum position of running Miramax Italy. According to multiple accounts, he had no film experience and his real job was to take care of Weinstein’s women needs, among other things. As head of Miramax Italy in 2003 and 2004, Fabrizio Lombardo was paid $400,000 for less than a year of employment.
6
Perhaps we’ve forgotten that our president was accused of the same behavior Mr. Weinstein is being accused of. How many women came out accusing Trump of inappropriate sexual behavior. Of course they were all lying. Not our President. He never tells a lie.
11
Not the same behavior. President Trump said “ I just grab their genitals” on tv! And he’d date his daughter who’s hot if he were single.
3
Every person whoever came in contact with Mr. Weinstein HAD TO KNOW that he was a sexual predator and harassed women. Meryl Streep chose to ignore it, as did others, due to the money he paid her and brought in. And it is an outrage that Saturday Night Live chose to continue the strategy of excuses for his behavior by not even poking fun of it. Shame on all in Hollywood for allowing this charade to continue. Does anyone really care about them anyway? Any comment from the male stars of the screen?
9
So Meryl Streep who called him “God” and the hundreds of great actors, directors and producer from around the world all knew he was a cad is what you propose. Ridiculous
2
Some say that the Clinton and Obama silence about Harvey Weinstein is deafening.
That is not true.
In fact, everyone can hear very clearly how their silence confirms the hypocrisy that everyone suspected.
11
I grew up in the '60s and '70s as did my older brother and sister, and I am completely outraged that this creep tries to excuse his sexual perversion and abuse of power as the result of that era. If anything, that was an era in which we were all beginning to demand equal respect and treatment of all people -- racial minorities, women, gays, etc. Weinstein and his behavior is that of the oppressor,, not the oppressed.
Second, shame, shame, shame on Lisa Bloom. Her "advice" to use photos of accusers in "friendly poses" with this pig is on the same spectrum of using rape survivors' past sexual history to attack their credibility. Lisa, as a woman lawyer and feminist, I consider you a disgrace both to women and to the legal profession. It is even more appalling given your supposed championing of victims of Bill Cosby. How come the "dinosaur" defense is okay for Weinstein, but not other rapists and abusers like Cosby, Trump, Ailes, O'Reilly, Polanski and Woody Allen?
10
The whole thing would be a subject of a movie which could perhaps educate people against harassment of the women.
4
Tip of the iceberg I say.
6
All this is very interesting. But could anyone please tell me just what constitutes sexual harassment?
Of course men hit on women. Powerful men even more.
Is this news?
He was clearly way beyond rude. Why didn't they walk away? Oh they were looking for favors? A simple transaction.
3
In the end, Weinstein will be back in the movie biz in short order. He has no trouble finding backers and partners willing to help finance a pic or two.
3
YES. Let's compare the Bill O'Reilly scandal to this one and Hollywood's reaction to the story:
BILL O'REILLY
April 1: NYT Article breaks story of sexual harassment issues
April 8: O'Reilly remains on air, O'Reilly is claiming that HE is the victim. No public action taken by Fox News. SNL does sketch against O'Reilly.
April 11: a week and a half AFTER NYT story): O"Reilly takes R & R. No acknowledgement of issue
April 19: Two and a half weeks AFTER NYT story: Fox fires O'Reilly
HARVEY WEINSTEIN
October 5: NYT Article breaks story of sexual harassment issues
October 5 (Same day as story breaks HW takes leave of absence apologizing and saying he's "caused a lot of pain."
October 8: HW fired three days after scandal breaks
Perhaps there is less of a need to issue denoucements when action has occurred.
4
NYT knew at least in 2004. Nice faux outrage. Try again. And where are all the SNL Weinstein sketches again?
2
I would have been genuinely shocked had Harvey Weinstein NOT behaved as he has - I thought this was widely known. Thus my first reaction was, isn't the Hollywood Couch very well known even among those not in the biz? Why is this news now? But then I realized how wrong and enabling my reaction was. Actors have every right to be in Hollywood seeking work without this kind of sleaze. And like so many things that have changed for the better in our culture, just because it's always been so doesn't take away the terrible, awful stench of this behavior. Also, I despise Trump but this is so much worse than what he was caught saying on tape. The hypocrisy and enabling by women - star actresses, producers, executives, etc. cannot be denied.
I'm glad and thankful that NYT has shed light on this instead of taking the stance that this type of thing is standard fare in Hollywood and not worth reporting. I would bet that there are even more serious, news worthy, and horrifying stories to be told.
9
This goes on in every industry, as untold numbers will attest. Along with many colleagues, I was coerced and harassed in Wall Street finance, Madison Avenue advertising, and Silicon Valley venture capital firms by men largely unknown outside the firms they ran. This is front-page news because it involves TMZ-level name recognition in our celebrity-obsessed culture.
12
Genuine question: what constitutes sexual harassment?
There is a very old British court case that concluded that "there is no harm in asking."
What did Mr. Weinstein actually do? Did he violate anyone's rights? Does love play a part in it? Is "sexual harassment" one of those things that is definable or is it one of those things that you know it when you see it, or both?
I think most people are missing the point. This is why we need even a flawed free press. Someone might get away for a long time and none of our motives are ever pure. But ultimately the record will be set straight. Murder will out and so will all sorts of bad behavior. None of us have a lock on virtue. Power will only protect you so far. Clinton will always be dogged by his behavior
3
Considering the horrible person HW always seemed to be the bigger news would have been a report indicating he never sexually harassed women. That others weren't aware of his behavior is about as believable as many of the silly Hollywood movie plots foisted on the American public.
18
Another prudent move for the Weinstein Company would be reconfigure its Board.
Eight male board members, really?
19
So much for a progressive movement in Hollywood, only in the movies or perhaps someone's vivid imagination. Hollywood land of make believe and overflowing with hypocrisy. You can't make this stuff up. And yet women still make less than men.
4
Fear not, for several board members have tendered their resignations. Perhaps you should submit, because, why not?
I had an all female crew on a tv show. They were independent, hilarious, crazy and great with me. It was the 1980s in NY. Get real
1
Let’s see. Big powerful producer who made remarkable films with working relationships with the most talented in the biz hits on actresses. That’s unusual? Nope. He wasn’t accused of drugging them like a famous comedian or grabbing their unmentionables like POTUS. It’s rude behavior they could have spoken up. Something is off in the reactions. And one I believe was reported earlier as an Italian notorious accuser of wealthy men who orchestrated meeting, accusing and settling in many countries.
11
I guess those women who "could have spoken up" don't need their jobs anymore, because I can promise you that losing their jobs would be the clearest and quickest consequence.
7
Your “promise” is your fantasy and feeling and not fact. You don’t know that. Even then there’s recourse.
1
I notice that Meryl Streep didn't chime in until AFTER Weinstein was fired, and even then says "nobody knew." what a joke. Of course he never harassed HER, because she was a powerful woman in her own right. These types harass the ones who are unlikely or unable to say anything. Streep is totally unaware of the difference between her situation and that of a woman with no power. Shame on Meryl Streep. I'll never think of her the same way again.
22
I’m sure she understands the difference between herself and young women trying to make it, but of course, she was once a young, unknown actress too. She said she didn’t know, she didn’t say she didn’t believe it.
8
When is Matt Damon going to say something? Harvey made Damon career with Goodwill Hunting. Damon has been a public advocate for women in the past. Damon has daughters. Where is he now? From Damon's 2016 MIT commencement speech: "And that’s what I want to urge you to do today: turn toward the problems you see. And don’t just turn toward them. Engage with them. Walk right up to them, look them in the eye ... then look yourself in the eye and decide what you’re going to do about them." http://news.mit.edu/2016/matt-damon-commencement-address-0603
15
You’re really off. Matt Damon has no obligation to speak up about this idiocy. Why him? Look at the films actors, directors and producers involved with Weinstein’s films. It’s huge so singling out Matt Damon is ridiculous. The whole uproar is ridiculous. Men hit on women. Oooh shocking.
2
Wake up. Men hit on women. His awkward approach and power and fame is what created the uproar the reaction is about. But the requests he made and approach are laughable. Ladies just say no thanks and walk out. Trump the grabber even knocked him and that’s because his politics are the opposite.
What a reflection all of these things are on our culture,
8
And therein lies the problem, as articulated by this flip response. Sorry, but when your career, your ambition, your talent and your reputation is in the hands of one of the most powerful influencers of your chosen industry -- it's not so easy to "just say no and walk out" particularly if, as the article details, you are blocked from walking out as a man fondles himself in front of you. For anyone, man or woman (or just about anyone who's ever held a job) that has ever had to suffer or tolerate unpleasant interactions with a boss to get hired, to keep a job or be promoted to the next one - sometimes just 'walking out' isn't an option.
10
And the Trump outrage was weak as was shock at his calling his daughter hot and he’d date her if she weren’t his daughter. Really guys? Producer trying to seduce women. This is much ado about little.
1
It’s always the option. You don’t have to be a lawyer to know that.
1
It is amusing seeing all these Hollywood stars who gave Roman Polanski a standing ovation at the Academy Awards now saying they are appalled at Weinstein's behavior.
15
Yes all hypocrites including the outrage over Weinstein to begin with.
No assault, no drugs, nothing - but childish fantasy of a man stupidly proposing sex in a pathetic way.
3
Given how insular Hollywood is, it is impossible to believe that his behavior was unknown. I'm guessing just about everyone associated with him knew about this - just like most comics long were aware of Cosby's behavior. People simply looked the other way until he had less financial value to them.
Good news that he is being held accountable - even if it is a decade late.
11
Ask Ashley Judd to watch you shower: Lose your job and have your career destroyed.
Brag about sexually assaulting dozens of women: move into the White House
23
You have got to be kidding me doing me -Trump bragged an off camera comment before he was POTUS-
Weinstein was a sexual deviant who physically assaulted women for years -while Hollywood turned a blind eye -the hypocrisy is beyond nauseating-
1
Like all…. He's sorry because he got caught…
There's no remorse whatsoever...
17
There remorse. It’s sad that he didn’t get therapy.
3
Therapy won't help.
1
"Actors and actresses in the community are appalled at Harvey and have gone on the record as such"
Apparently this man's criminal behavior was an open secret in Hollywood for decades -- where were these "appalled" actors and actresses then? They seem only to be appalled now that it is fashionable. Truly an amoral industry.
22
I work in the industry and I think the truth was somewhere in between. People knew he was a bully. As a young 20-something seeking employment, I was once told, "There's an assistant job at the Weinstein Company ... but I don't think you want it." But the story about Harvey was that he yelled at people; he was considered a bully, but it was perceived to be part of his big brash personality -- a kind of "test by fire" to work for him. The sexual rumors were new to me; I suspect they were new to a lot of people. People could know he was "difficult" and not know he was masturbating in front of female journalists while he blocked the door. The difference is that everybody in his office witnessed the bullying, and the other was clearly something he did in private -- in he-said/she-said situations where the woman was unlikely to be believed. So a lot of people aren't totally surprised that he was an awful bully in private (because he was a bully in public) but didn't know that it extended to stuff like this.
7
The Hollywood denizens are expressing themselves to be " shocked ... simply shocked "; somewhat reminiscent of those post WW2 Germans who expressed shocked disbelief at revelations of the Holocaust, " ... but we didn't know ".
10
"The firing of Mr. Weinstein by his own company, Ms. Konner said, 'is going to scare any man in Hollywood using his power for anything but making movies and television.'"
Don't kid yourself.
17
This private sector guy gets canned for sexual harassment ...and we elect a president after he admits to sexual assault.
14
This is why they hate us. No, not liberals vs. conservatives, but the world in viewing the United States.
The powerful prey upon the dependent: slumlords coerce favors in place of back rent; honorable men rape their wives, children, cleaning women and nannies at home and their secretaries and clerks at the office; educators exchange grades for sex; the law enforcement official, if so inclined, will do whatever he or she pleases as will the healthcare provider; predators rape the children they are hired to escort across borders to safety; the truly depraved attack children and the elderly; the most heinous, domesticated animals and pets. These occurrences are all too common here and globally.
Daily, "rhinestone cowboys" in the guise of aspiring actors, singers, dancers, musicians, writers, journalists, and artists of every stripe flow into the capitals of their craft greeted by the wolves at the gates of Los Angeles, New York, Nashville, D.C., etc.
But why is it that we politicize only the exploitation of the latter, "golden" groups? Did Miramax/TMC hire no Republicans? Was it only liberals who prospered from association with the company, no conservatives enjoyed their film products? Our hypocrisy is galling.
Yes, Harvey Weinstein is a shameful individual, but surely the world worries more about our attention to North Korea than to Hollywood, as should we; Weinstein is only capable of greenlighting a career, not in launching a nuclear war.
This is why they hate us.
11
“Tale as old as time, Beauty and the BEAST”...he should have run for President, an executive office where all is absolved these days....
8
In 2004 the Times knew about this and stuffed the story as "unimportant." How things change...
11
I don't think anyone has to give back the money they got from this creep. They take small donations from jerks, they don't know, every day of the week. Just turn your backs on him, and never have anything to do with him, again. He is now a pariah, wherever he goes.n Stick a fork in him.
5
Strange thing that many commenting are forcing this to be seen through a political lens.
If Weinstein is liberal then what? That is somehow "proof" or justification for your worldview? Then somehow all people that maintain liberal viewpoints are to have their viewpoints discredited?
Roger Ailes and Bill O'Reilly are no more representative of the Right as a whole than Harvey is of the Left. And if we are being honest, are just as Hollywood considering they are in the network entertainment industry.
It's about people using their positions of wealth and power to intimidate others within their industry to satisfy their sexual sicknesses. Full stop.
13
Weinstein's wife co-own Marchesa clothing line. Why aren't we calling for a movement to "Ivanka Trump" Marchesa? Blackball Marchesa from stores, online shopping and in the fashion industry. To believe that Weinstein's wife knew nothing about this, is ludicrous. Come On Hollywood- let's be consistent.
13
This is Geogena Chapman’s fault?
What is next? Are liberal progressive actor poster boys Alec Baldwin and Sean Penn going to hold a benefit where they will be lecturing us on the moral evils of conservatism and then trading notes on techniques of emotional and physical abuse? How about Leos infamous players clubs with the mass consume and release philosophy to courtship. Please give us all a break from the fake moral outrage.
7
As a woman who applauds efforts to end the objectification of women, I am perplexed, disappointed and sickened by 1. How print abd other media continue to objectify women via suggestive dress and poses (two cases in point: Women’s Health magazine September cover, and Sports Illustrated 2017 swimsuit edition), and 2. How women continue to objectify themselves in these publications. P.S. Women’s Health and Sports Illustrated: Do you really think so little of women? And to our wonderful female athletes: how come no public pushback from you?????
6
Mr. Weinstein,
I guess it’s true. At a certain age you have the face you deserve...
6
Do you think that feminist groups will strap on their pink lady part hats and come out in droves to protest? Nah it's Hollywood.
13
The fashion industry should be boycotting Marchesa, which is co-owned by Weinstein's wife. Dont hold your breath to see if Hollywood treats Marchesa like they did Ivanka Trump clothing line.
7
right, because being summarily fired from his own company just days after his grotesque actions were reported isn't enough. the fact that chuck schumer, along with several other members of the senate minority have either returned or given his donations to women's charities isn't enough. if women don't immediately run to pat men on the back for getting rid of one of their own, it's hypocritical. thanks for reducing the feminist ideology to "pink lady part hats," though. not reductive.
7
Such a sweet face, no wonder so many very smart women were deceived.
11
If I was walking down the street and a similar situation occurred, it would be classified as a crime. I don't care if there is a D Oran R next to your name, this is disgusting. Think, please, of your daughter, sisters, mothers, wives having to put up with this.
Not too many people are just appearing as actors. Women have been working on their craft - plays, voice lessons, movement, head shots, complete rejection.
They aren't there to serve these perverts pleasures, they are professionals. And the actresses who have achieved success and fame should remember when they started out. SPEAK UP, HOLLYWOOD. Now is the time to show a complete higher ground
14
Even if Hollywood doesn't speak up, we all should do express our outrage towards these attitudes and actions that create a larger gap in gender and isolate women. It is a shame that we live in a society that in many instances contradicts itself.
Why are women subject to sexual assault so frequently? Why aren't we respected as equally qualified and equally capable of working productively? I feel that as a woman and immigrant, I have to be vigilant though it is irrational. We should not tolerate this behavior at any level.
6
So will Obama and Clinton say anything???
16
What about Clooney and DeNiro?
4
Should they? Would it matter if they did?
2
Will you say something about Trump?
4
This is a surreal world we live in. The head of a private corporation leaves his own company because of his harassment of women -- in an era when we have elected a President who is a confessed serial groper (while BIlly Bush, the media cutey who merely listened to this confession, was ousted from his job). Who'd have thought that corporate media America would be taking the lead in doing away with this stain on our country.
12
The industry where the term "casting couch" originated has a lot of cleaning up to do. Expose the pigs. Give women a break.
17
It's not always women who are victims of this type of abuse sorry to say.
5
Why not accept reality, as we always have?
Men pursue women for sex (sometimes it is the reverse, thanks to the modern liberation of women).
Rarely actually physically harmful, it has been this way for thousands of years.
Nobody should be forced, but these cases sound like haggling over the price.
If these prudes were in charge the human race would be extinct.
3
I agree!
I give up: Why should she be mentioned?
"Why is Weinstein's (also) famous wife not given a single mention in any of these articles at nytimes?"
The original Times article (and maybe others) did mention that HW is married. Isn't that enough? Why should she be named?
11
It is unimaginable that his wife did not/does not know about his behavior. She should be held to answer questions similar to how they questioned Ivanka Trump and blackballed her clothing line. Weinsteins wife co-owns 1/2 of Marchesa clothing line. Beautiful clothes. Im just looking for consistency in how Hollywood treats those who act this way or those that protect those who act this way.
4
I noticed that all department stores have now refused to sell the Marchesa line of clothing. No wait that didn't happen and never will.
2
I'm sure this idiot isn't really sorry "about all the pain I've caused". What he is sorry about is that the dirty "secret" was brought to light. Another example of a wealthy, powerful male using his position to hit on young women. What I am waiting for is the outrage on late night TV, all the celebrities and liberal icons speaking out - otherwise they are hypocrites -willing to pillage a right winger but not a liberal who in despicable behavior.
17
Interesting to note that none of the Hollywood elitists who are constantly bashing Trump as being a misogynist, have said anything about Weinstein. Typical hypocrites.
17
Meryl Streep came out with a comment today if it matters. Only four days in.
1
Meryl Streep made a statement.
3
Weinstein is not current president of the United States who, while campaigning, was caught on tape openly bragging about how he guerrilla-groped women's pubic areas and freely ogled his unclad teen beauty pageant contestants by walking unannounced into their group changing room. Coincidentally the statements were made en route to a Hollywood entertainment show interview where we saw the unfortunate woman host greet Donald, unaware of what he had confessed to minutes earlier.
2
He's also married to Georgina Chapman, the owner of Marchesa.
That company is notorious for not paying their hourly sample room workers overtime. The same goes for trying to get paid as a freelancer.
19
I like it when Democrats get caught.
4
He’s a Democrat and not a politician. How is that “Democrats” getting caught? Being a sleaze is not a partisan issue.
5
Still Hollywood stays predominantly silent. Give them someone who does not lean left and they would be lined up to condemn,feign indignation and declare moral self-righteousness!!!
12
Eventually, you have got your DSK-like scandal! I am not talking about the alleged misconducts themselves but the deafening silence of the medias for years about those two powerful men, although many people had known that their approach of women were...objectionable.
8
I'm still waiting for Clinton and Obama to denounce him. Did I miss it?
21
Thank you, New York Times, for pulling back the curtain of sexual harassment in the workplace! You have proven you are not biased with equal time for Harvey Weinstein, Roger Ailes, and Bill O'Reilly-- proving once again, that "dirty old men" are not Republicans or Democrats, but just high powered guys that take advantage of women anyway they can! The Hollywood "Director's Couch" has been a well known part of movie lore since the film industry came to town in the 1920s. It's about time someone not only noticed, but had the courage to report it!
15
they knew about in 2004, so what took them so long...
8
It's not about Harvey ... or The Donald ... or O'Reilly ... or Ailes ... or Kalanick. It's about abuse of power. It's the Masculine abuse of the Feminine. The "conquering" of the feminine - in this instance via sexual conquest - is what the Industrialized world is about. The trampling and raping of the earth (feminine principle) is simply an extension. Climate Change?? The denial factors are exactly the same for the men who perpetrate rape and harassment on women via abuse of power. Sickeningly sad. Paternalistic. Old Testament. Shockingly universally found. Male species = testosterone.
9
What did Bob Weinstein know was going on as it was going on? I doubt Bob didn’t know women were being paid for silence.
9
I bet the whole board knew of the settlements. Rose McGowan is right to call for the resignation of the entire board.
11
Mark Thomason wisely predicts:
"In a few months, once the immediate attention passes, he'll be as good as his next movie again."
I can see the reviews already. They'll all start something like this: "Make no mistake about it: Harvey Weinstein is a bad guy. But [MOVIE TITLE], which Weinstein produced, is one of the best movies to come along in many years. [Etc., etc., etc.]
And those who today vow never to set foot in a movie theater that shows a Harvey Weinstein movie will flock to his new production, carefully explaining to anyone who cares to listen that their viewing of his new movie is in no way an expression of approval for his terrible behavior [etc., etc., etc.].
9
Waiting for the next Vanity Fair Oscars party when all will be taking selfies with him.
1
“I see this as a tipping point,” Jenni Konner, executive producer of the HBO series “Girls,” said on Sunday. “This is the moment we look back on and say, ‘That’s when it all started to change.’”
Oh really? We just elected a POTUS who got caught sexually harassing a woman in the crudest terms. Caught red-handed. And still got elected.
15
Harvey Weinstein is a very naughty boy who finally got caught.
Now time for some more outing of those in power in this nasty industry.
The ones who go after children.
15
So what do Weinstein, Ailes, O'Reilly, and Trump have in common? Looks like only the huckster got away...
7
Gee I would have thought this would be ripe for the picking for an SNL skit but wait, no Alec Baldwin as a bloated Weinstein opening the show. Guess they had to protect the shameful piggish man instead of exposing (no pun intended) the man for what he is. Such hypocrisy.
11
Apparently some of my fellow liberals didn't get the memo. The silence is deafening. Weinstein joins fellow pigs O'Reilly, Ailes et al.
15
All those who knew about Harvey Weinstein and his sexual harassments are just as much to blame as Mr, Weinstein. He could not have continued if people around him did not cover up. Years? and No one ever speakes up?
10
Why do newspapers always give us the age of such sexual harassers, be it TV, Religious, or Political top-leaders. We all know that they only get arrested when they are old (past 65) and no longer of any use to our pocket book.
2
It occurs to me that men are always at deuce.
They have created a great world culture -- indeed, there are men who tell me that is what makes them superior to women -- and over centuries have systematically destroyed it only to rebuild and destroy it again.
Is this the way of human nature or male nature? Would women do the same had they the power and opportunity?
We'll never know in our current iteration, which is dominated by megalomaniacal males run amok. -- thegamesmenplay.com
2
Do you really think women agents, producers, actors, casting directors, etc. do not leverage their ability to assist young actors of both genders? The combo of power/libido/abuse is an equal opportunity character flaw.
3
Perhaps, Harvey can join Trump in the White House now.
5
This is such a bizarre story in so many ways, but my question is this: are the women who took huge payouts from Weinstein and knowingly let him off the hook to prey on other women the "heroes" Meryl Streep was referring to?
6
So what does this have to do with governing the United States of America in the Age of Trump?
Harvey Weinstein was and is no William Jefferson Clinton. Bill and Hillary were honored welcomed guests at the nuptials of Donald and Melania.
5
My expectations for how Hollywood sweeps this kind of thing under the rug are shaped by the reaction when the U.S. tried to extradite Roman Polanski from Switzerland for sentencing on rape charges for an underage girl. Many well-known actors (and more than a few actresses) rose to defend him against the "injustice" of being held accountable even though Polanski is no longer a power broker and by all accounts aimed his abuse at girls under the age of 18. Now, of course, others are coming forward. It's almost never just one.
19
A victimized woman's choices are usually presented as "binary:" either "go public" with what has happened or keep it to oneself (and maybe one's close friends and/or mother).
There's a third choice: Say "no" but then DON'T report it.
That third choice does mean, of course, that the victimized woman probably won't get a desired movie part, or a lucrative cash settlement. But it also means the bad guy will have one more "data point" showing that his caddish behavior doesn't "work." Maybe that will cause him to stop -- maybe not, but it will affect some bad guys. And the woman will accomplish a great deal: When she DOES get a movie part, or a great job, or some other success, skeptics won't be wondering whether that resulted from her sleeping with the boss. And maybe other women will be spared the same sort of victimization down the road.
This doesn't excuse the Harvey Weinsteins of the world. But there might be fewer Harvey Weinsteins in the world if the ones who are there learned that it never works.
1
I'm looking forward to some noble, fiery-eyed, high-minded, anti-HW acceptance speech denunciations from actors/writers/producers at the awards ceremonies this year! Finally! Oh wait...what's that you say? Rose McGowan and Seth Rogan probably won't be nominated this year? Sigh. K, maybe next time.
3
IF you are referring to how Hollywood reacted to Mr. Trump, I bet that if HE had taken a leave of absence as soon as the allegations against him hit and then was "fired" within 72 hours or less by the Republicans (thus equating his circumstances to HW), then you probably wouldn't have had those fiery speeches, so not sure what why you would think anyone would feel the need for such a speech in this case.
2
In the scheme of things, this firing isn't all that important. However, when you realize the power over our entertainment industry that this man had, it becomes worth noting.
Julia Phillips, a powerful producer in the 70's ( Close Encounters of a Third Kind, among others) wrote in her autobiography, "You'll Never Eat Lunch in This Town Again", of similar behavior by just about every film industry male.
But her best line, and one that has stuck with me in all of our discussions about Hollywood's influence on our popular culture ( and social mores???) , was her discription of the intelligence of these film titans.
" the ones making the decisions are, for the most part, the kind of people who move their lips when they read". Think about that the next time you hail one of these guys as a genius.
14
Makes one want to laugh and cry
2
yes Weinsteins behavior is inexcusable. However since his behavior was known, i question the timing of this. Could it have had something to do with launching a Trevon Martin film? Or perhaps the company finances could of played a part?
Hard for the "first" person to speak out against any powerful person that has abused them. It takes guts and knowing it's the right thing to do. Just as in recent cases about powerful successful men and the list of women who have come forward about their abuse -- to anyone who has been abused -- speak up loudly!!
2
How many of the people firing Mr Weinstein knew about his harassment and kept silent? It happens because there are a number of people keeping silent and letting it occur. The company cannot rid themselves of guilt by getting rid of one person.
17
There is nothing shocking about the Harvey Weinstein affair. This behavior has persisted since the very inception of Hollywood. Who knew what when will of course never be public but it does expose the utter hypocrisy of the people who are part of this business. What is really outrageous is the behavior of fawning politicians who lust after their support both vocal and financial then flee when scandal becomes front page news. The fact that many of the powerful actors, directors and producers have spoken out in support of strict gun control laws while making in movies that glorify
gun violence makes a mockery of the moral righteousness. This industry is severely wanting in every respect.
3
Since corporations are people, just firing this guy shouldnt be the end of it. The corporation must be prosecuted and incarcerated in the same way an individual would. And for a period of time it should cease to exist.
People are talking as if it is a 'male power' problem. Yes, but not only that. How many womem try to use their 'charms' to jump ahead in the line by 'jumping into bed'. Both, bots and girls must be taught to stand on merit.
1
When will rich, powerful men recognize that their suave, persuasive, seductive personae are only enhanced by their wealth and influence?
Oh, wait, just answered my own question. Sorry, forgot about Steve Miller.
Regards,
JV
1
The reason I had to bail on being anything remotely like a "progressive" (despite communist parents) was that I figured out that it's all simply lip-service. No evidence of anything will ever manage to dissuade the true believer, In other words, to paraphrase Mark Twain, "give a man a reputation as a 'progressive' and he can jump on women all he wants." It's genius! Tell me I'm wrong.
7
This is just another sorry case of what happens when a political party, i. e. democrats, gets in bed with an influential, high profile, big time donor whom when the donor slips up, it becomes political fodder for the opposition. Unlike Fox and the Ailes/O'Reilly fiasco where Republicans displayed that they really don't alot much importance to the sexual abuse of women, democrats considered themselves above all of that.
Weinstein's antics and the obvious cover-up certainly doesn't help the democrats cause.
Use this as an opportunity to have discussions about what it means to "objectify" or "exploit" women. The tolerance of Weinstein and the adulation of Hefner demonstrate our need to confront the too-widely-held view that women's central attribute, whether in an office or relationship, is how attractive her body is to men. More of us need to speak with men about whether all women like to be ogled, find it flattering to be grabbed in an elevator, etc. No more assumptions that women like men to demonstrate that a woman is attractive, that sexual attraction is an irresistible force, etc
33
"No more assumptions that women like men to demonstrate that a woman is attractive, that sexual attraction is an irresistible force, etc"
A couple of years ago a woman I was dating broke up with me because I told her she wasn't beautiful. She was very attractive for the many other reasons I was trying to point out to her.
Any of you men want to try this? Maybe it's time for women to change too.
2
Who will play Harvey Weinstein in the film adaptation of this protracted, salacious scenario? And who will fund it?
3
Ari Emanuel? On both counts.
2
How about Alec Baldwin, he's good at portraying people with misogynistic overinflated egos. Oh wait he didn't due an imitation of him this week. Still I'd think he'd be a natural. Perhaps Lorne Michaels will accept a co-producer title. Oh wait he doesn't mock and ridicule other misogynistic NY'ers does he?
Yeah he does.
3
The sexual harassment thing is the pin this is being hung on, with obviously substantial legitimacy on it's own. But there's a 'more to the story' part; a lot of people with long memories see this as someone finally getting his long-deserved comeuppance.
4
So, Mr. Weinstein's actions were OK with the board -- as long as nobody outside the company knew about them? Or outside Hollywood? Or until they are exposed by investigative reporting, and subject to public outrage and outcry? Shameful Hypocrisy.
17
Sounds like his actions were also okay with the actresses (like Judd) and others that settled and still got to be in Weinstein's productions. It's never okay and maybe if they'd had some guts to tell their story earlier, others could have been spared his 'advances'.
4
Well said!
Rich for Mr. Trump to state he had known Mr. Weinstein "for a long time" and was "not al all surprised" to see the reports. Illustrative that Mr. Trump did not criticize Weinstein's behavior. After all, how could he in light of the "Hollywood Access" tape? Weinstein and Trump: Simply shocking and repulsive as both used power, money and "I am a star" status to assault women. Where are the criminal charges for assault?
18
Good for the NY Times in bringing this to light. A related question is why the California press and specifically the Hollywood press did not uncover this much sooner. And one must conclude that powerful editorial forces kept these stories hidden from public view.
11
Sure, get professional help. But as presented so far, this is a case of bad behavior, not mental illness.
11
I'm not sure that therapy will help someone who is obviously a bully. Doesn't really matter what sort of a bully one is .. it still sounds like an overwhelming job to me.
3
Mr. Weinstein is a scoundrel, no mistake.
But there's a lot of hypocrisy here, which should be openly discussed and addressed if society is to solve the very serious problem of sexual harassment.
Consider the statement in the article that many women are “frustrated with an industry that seems stuck perpetually sexualizing and mistreating women.” “Mistreatment” should surely stop, though it’s worth talking about just what the word means in this context. But does anyone really expect Hollywood to stop “sexualizing” women? Memo to the world: sex sells. And, lets be frank, many actresses are willing participants in many forms of “sexualization.” So, for that matter, are many actors.
Sex and sexualization are an inevitable part of television and movie entertainment, because sex is such a major part of human life.
But surely there should be limits. On July 14th, 2017 the Times Style Magazine published a cover story on Natalie Portman’s role as a director. The article was heavily illustrated. Thing was, Ms. Portman, an attractive woman, wasn’t wearing any pants, just a bikini bottom. Some of the poses were frankly provocative. Such blatant objectification was totally unnecessary and inappropriate in an article describing Ms. Portman as a director.
Sometimes the Times is part of the problem, not part of the solution. As I said, there’s a lot of hypocrisy on this issue.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/14/t-magazine/natalie-portman-jonathan-s...
34
I just checked out that article and you're right, the provocative shots were totally unnecessary, and undermine her debut as a director. Bummer.
3
In complete agreement but surely Ms. Portman could have said something and demanded that there was no need for pictures like that to be taken as they did not have a direct relation to the story being written. She's a big enough star and I'm sure they would have complied.
4
to Alex of Indiana,
Thank you for bringing up the Portman photos by the T Magazine! I bought the NYT print version of that day and it bothered me when I opened it!
I wondered why women, especially those as talented as Natalie Portman and media as politically correct as NY Times, could approve such publication!
Sometimes I wonder what the definition of a feminist is and that of advocate of women's rights is.
So far, I still have not seen the subscriber email from Vogue to denounce Harvey Weinstein directly. They just reported that "Meryl Streep Responds to Harvey Weinstein Allegations". What light words they use when they see a real predator!
Thank you NYTimes for reporting the Harvey Weinstein crimes againt women!
Shame on Hollywood and the most political women's fashion magazine on keeping silence on HW or make it sound as light as possible!
3
If nothing else he sure is/was a grubby-looking guy. I wonder how much that has to do with the general outrage. Maybe if he had been a matinee idol instead of a mogul...
4
You really think that his looks are the deciding factor here on outrage here?!!? The outrage is objectifying women - abusing women - regardless of what they look like. Herein lies the problem that some men will never get. Give us women more credit than you do in your comment.
7
Harvey Weinstein? I'll bet he was as well-known a month ago as Colin Kaepernick was a year ago. What I'm missing in the Weinstein Saga is why it matters to the vast majority of Americans. The guy's a bum, apparently his pals always knew it, now we know it. Today he's on the front page nationally. Where is Puerto Rico?
4
"Today he's on the front page nationally. Where is Puerto Rico?"
I think Puerto Rico is somewhere back on page 11 or so, right next to the story about Las Vegas.
4
No no no no no—you two don’t get to pull this old number. Puerto Rico and Las Vegas have had a lot of front page coverage. Harvey Weinstein is a major force in the film industry and yes, a lot of average folks know who he is and guess what, have seen his movies. This is news worthy. Sexual harassment by people in power matters.
8
Hollywood is rampant with people like Weinstein. Weinstein is a valid example of Hollywood culture and liberal progressives should be attacking Hollywood, and its tainted millions of dollars that it donates to the Democratic party each year - the party that supposedly supports women, just like they attacked Bill O'Reilly as indicative of Fox News culture as being poisonous to women. Let's not be hypocrites.
6
His name should have been stricken from any authorized use as soon as his deeds were publicized. He is, simply, a more coarse and uncivilized version of "our Man in the Awful Office". Evidently, Weinstein and his conduct have been well-known for years and he simply bought his way out of the incidents. That should end immediately. Only in Court should his name ever be uttered.........
3
Is Hollywood going to fire 75 percent of male movie producers? Are Leo and Meryl going to lecture us on morality at the next 10 award shows? The headline should be,.. its business as usual in every industry until sexual harassment publicity threatens backlash. Hopefully, Americans will get over the whole sex and nudity thing at some point. Right now, they are too obsessed with being offended.
7
Are we supposed to be getting over sex and nudity or getting over sexual harassment?
3
Are these women victims in the purest sense? Don't get me wrong, I think Weinstein is disgusting for what he did but I believe the women understood what's in store for them before they went to him. His reputation wasn't exactly a secret and the practice not isolated. It's a trade-off these women knew and were willing to do.
It's like no one hangs out at high crime neighborhood unless there's something for them. And one can hardly be surprised if she/he becomes victimized while there.
Don't go PC on me, I just believe that accountability applies to all.
7
So basically, you're arguing that women have no place in that industry? Girls, it's your own fault for leaving the kitchen. Genius.
2
Did you read the other Times article linked in this one? These young women agreed to meetings with him because they were hoping to get ahead in their careers, not hoping to fend off weird advances. It is perfectly normal and acceptable for women to think that when a hugely influential and successful person shows interest in their careers, they should follow up on it. It’s ridiculous to think they went in expecting to be harassed, and even if they went in being fearful of it, how is that their fault??? Oh, we have such a long way to go.
2
This is why I'm so peeved:
I expect this sort of behavior from repressed, hypocritical conservatives who preach "family values," pro-life, abstinence lifestyles and insist on taking the bible literally, forcing this entire cultural array down our throats. Like preachy priests and Dennis Hastert.
When a so-called "liberal lion" acts in disgusting and repulsive ways I feel extra angry and want justice served all the more because he is even more hypocritical than the conservatives: while the right preaches these holy ideals about how to live, the left actually practices them through civil rights, feminism the like.
For comparison, when Wal-Mart acts to beat up its wholesale suppliers raining havoc on the low-wage laborers around the world, when it pays punishingly low wages to its own employees and when it seeks rent off of the people of the world who need the basic goods in life to live, I expect repulsive, rapacious behavior, and so I just keep moving on.
But when liberal Starbucks acts like a "pariah" company, and sets out to put all the mom and pop coffee shops out of business, all the while has patronizing marketing slogans and baristas treating you like you are the most special person in the world when all they really want is your money twice a day for the rest of your life, I boil up to a hateful rage.
Let this Weinstein guy rot in a stew of his our hypocrisy and mendacity, but most of all strip him of all his cash suing him until he is destitute.
4
There's something sinister lurking deep under all this. Weinstein's behavior has been public knowledge for years. Somebody close to him wanted him gone.
3
Similar to Cosby this is something the entertainment industry has known for decades.
Why he is now being singled out is anyone's guess but speaks mostly to societal norms that are simply zero tolerant of such behavior.
My suggestion is that he go away to reflect (South of France or something) and come back doing what he does best which is making some of the finest films of the latter 20th c.
2
The Hollywood Shuffle is a tricky dance. One false step and you could be out long before the music stops playing. Jennifer Lawrence and Gwyenth Paltrow should give lessons on how not to step on the toes of the man leading you from the dance floor to the Oscar stage.
5
We need a movie as good as "Spotlight" to tell this sordid, drawn-out story. So many parallels.
5
I find it distressing that while much of the focus is on Weinstein’s vulgar and crude behavior much of his actual criminal behavior in the form of physical assaults is largely glossed over. Pushing people down stairs or into walls, choking them, throwing things at people (make and female) is yet another level beyond, that of actual physical violence not just embarrassment. This guy should be in jail.
16
I would not give back one penny of the money donated by this man. This money was not evil. It was the man who perpetrated the acts. If anything he should be paying the money as an act of contrition.
Don't be so self-righteous that you cut off your nose to spite your face. Debra Reece Simons
Asheville North Carolina
2
A dirty old man with immense money and power, what could possibly go wrong. I don't think he has some illness that needs therapy, he just finally got caught.
18
If I may for a moment put aside judging the loathsome, criminal behaviour of Mr. Weinstein, I find in this incident further proof that money and power alone do not guarantee love. Or in his case, willing sex partners.
Perhaps his behaviour is a response to his discovery, upon becoming rich and powerful that Woody Allen was right, and that all success bought him was rejection by a better class of women. If so, his response informs us that as unappealing as he is to regard, his soul is even uglier.
6
Harvey Weinstein got away with harassment for so long because the women who he harassed and the men who knew about it said NOTHING. The women even took money and allowed him to continue his spree. There are a lot of guilty parties here.
6
Apparently, some well-known actors such as Matt Damon and Russell Crowe sat on stories about this guy. The actresses who accepted pay-outs also were complicit. They got paid off but didn't warn anyone else.(like up and coming actresses). Now, they may have had clauses that exchanged money for silence, but why agree to that in the first place? It's unethical.
2
Usually when one takes the money there is a gag order in place. Had any of those who were paid off tipped anyone they probably would have had to forfeit the money. Money apparently was much more important above all else including a conscience.
I keep hearing this, but I don't accept it:
"Everyone in the film industry has known about Harvey Weinstein for decades."
I don't think much of Hillary Clinton, but I do think she wouldn't have taken a dime from Harvey Weinstein if she'd known he'd done these things. Nor do I think the Obamas would have let their daughter (Malia) work as an intern for this guy's company if they'd known she might be in danger.
In short, "Hollywood" might have known, but the rest of us -- including Hillary Clinton and the Obamas -- did not.
10
Oh please. Hillary will take money from anything and anyone. And she remains married to a guy who's done the same thing. As for Malia - I would guess they figured it would be no danger with the secret service circling around her at all times. But they knew. They ALL knew.
8
Sure Hillary knew. She's not stupid. She knows all those people, gets her money there. She knows HW.
Furthermore, she was able to live with her husband doing the same, and she covered for him doing, and she abused the women who came forward.
Furthermore, she knew all about Trump too, and went to his wedding and took his money anyway, until he became her opponent.
10
The Obamas feared nothing as Malia was shadowed everywhere by heavily armed secret service agents. Weinstein could never spirit her away for a private "tour" of anything.
Ms. Clinton speaks volumes by her continued silence about the subject.
4
I don't understand why this person's firing over sexual harassment has merited so much attention. It feeds into the narrative that the media elites are more consumed with their bubble than what is happening out in the rest of the US. I would venture to guess that 80% of the population has no idea who Harvey Weinstein is, let alone care that he's another sexist predatory entitled white man and that he's lost his job and probably will lose a significant part of his wealth over being said predator.
That I'm getting alerts on my NYT and NPR apps on my phone that he has been fired is self-congratulatory clap-trap. Who cares that he's been fired.?
3
Hollywood Gone Wild: Take 4!
Naughty by nature, this wave of filthy rich moguls exploiting young women appears to be an epidemic.
Hugely successful men, all of whom are/were figuratively and literally dirty old men.
But under the guise of offering grandfather-like financial support and promises of placing the targeted victim's career on a trajectory of success, these aging sexual predator's--- former Fox News head Roger Ailes, reality TV show host Donald Trump, comedian Bill Cosby, and now Producer Harvey Weinstein, sadistic pornographic egos were held hostage by this notion of preying "upon" inexperienced talent with impunity.
All the targeted victims --- unlike their octogenarian victimizer, coincidentally just happen to have been young, beautiful,talented, restless, and ambitious.
Harvey Weinstein is but the latest revulsion whose hushed reputation as a sexual predatory has been exposed by the New York Times.
Groundbreaking investigative reporting, the NY Times piece reads like the transcript from an NC-17 episode of Animal Planet: "Laughing hyenas versus the innocent gazelles."
4
They’re not all octogenarians and they were likely all young men when this behavior started. It isn’t caused by getting old.
3
Harvey Weinstein's Op-Es defense of Roman Polanski, in retrospect, was written out of self-interest. Weinstein argued that Polanski was too big and too great to be held responsible.
Movie directors, please.
3
In my view this is quite hilarious. Since Holywood was established male execs have been exploiting females in their business. The BOD of Weinstein's company is probably loaded with sexual predators who have not yet been caught. Some females to include Marilyn Monroe have used their bodies to "get brakes" and they will continue to do so.
Hollywood can not revoke human nature and never will be able to.
The ONLY mystery here is why Weinstein did not hire prostitutes to take care of his needs. He certainly had enough money to do so.
2
Because it isn't sex; it's power
3
It is more likely both. The IMF chief who was ousted was ousted becuase it was bizarre and abundant sex. Weinstein seems to be bizarre sex but not that abundant. Bill Cosby with his use of drugs was probably more focused on the power.
The sex industry exists to meet their carnel needs and those dopes need to use it.
1
"President Trump, who has himself been accused of making unwelcome advances toward women, told reporters on Saturday that he had known Mr. Weinstein “for a long time” and was “not at all surprised to see” the reports." Guess it takes one to know one.
4
And yet, respected Hollywood actors, producers, and directors, even Meryl Streep for goodness sake who seems like a decent person, support Roman Polanski, a convicted pedophile who fled the country before his sentence was carried out. When will his day be due?
I just don't understand how raping and sodomizing a child is defensible in Hollywood. And I'm a liberal... for goodness sake. Time for Hollywood to clean up these messes once and for all. They aren't gods, just actors, producers, and directors.
9
Weinstein' repugnant and I can only hope that, as some readers observe, this is just the beginning of other predators falling from power. And Lisa Bloom's role as his defender is a disgrace to women. I will certainly avoid watching any shows featuring her "expertise."
4
As long as Weinstein owns a share of the company working with the company will be like working with Weinstein. Let's see what the Hollywood crowd does.
1
"If every guy who ever harassed women can no longer donate to political parties, it might just solve the role of money in politics."
I'd say Harvey Weinstein's donating days are over. Can you even imagine what the news media would do with a report that Candidate X had accepted a donation from Harvey Weinstein?
At the very least, HW's political donations will need to be very carefully disguised -- run through several Super PACs, for example, and mixed with other donors' money along the way. Even then, a determined journalist probably will figure it out.
Harvey Weinstein may be wiser to focus future donations on non-political matters. His politics days are over.
3
What's disgraceful is that this abominable behavior has gone on for decades and not just with Mr. Weinstein. The cajoling, threatening, "advise," from "friends" for vicitims to remain silent has been endemic. It's not going to magically go away because this man has been fired. Just saying "No" does not stop this atrocious exploitation. It paints the individual as being "difficult," "not talented," "a problem," all code definitions to punish, belittle, and shun. The industry is rife with sexual abuse of both women and men. The attitude has been "It's just part of the business." and the business is trade.
32
Thank you for pointing out that men in Hollywood get abused too - especially very young ones. See Corey Feldman's memoir, for example.
6
Why has it taken so long to come out of the dark ages with accusations being made and taken seriously? There is a long list of VIPs who escaped the type of scrutiny and legal action they richly deserved. JFK and LBJ were notorious for their abuse of their office against many women with no real consequences. I have seen it pervasively on organic farms I used to work on with low pay; farm managers used their power to take advantage of vulnerable, young female workers with no consequences. Only in the last 20 or so years have we had these high profile exposes.
4
It is not the same at all. Kennedy sought out willing women, and seduced them. They were happy to be there, and happy to come back too. It was no way for a married man to treat his wife, but it seems they had a deal about that.
What Weinstein did was pure abuse. He cornered women. His pleasure seems to have been from their discomfort and his power to force them.
Kennedy never once did that to any woman. It is not the same at all.
10
Have you read Seymour Hersh's "The Dark Side of Camalot" or one of the many books on LBJ? There is a fine line between "voluntary" and expected due to the "stature" of someone. The sheer number of interns, mob women like Judith Exner, the east German woman Rometsch and prostitutes is highly problematic both legally and politically. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2511225/Kennedy-Ford-affairs-Eas...
1
Times do change. Segregation is no longer tolerated. The men you name are dead. The others cannot now say they don't know better.
This guy needs to be in jail for his actions. Will it happen, no way. They will let him pout in his home for the next 12-18 months and then say he is all better now....
4
In a few months, once the immediate attention passes, he'll be as good as his next movie again.
6
Not much sympathy, but this would have been more convincing if they did this some time ago, rather than after they had no choice They are acting to protect themselves not women
6
A lot of people are keeping quiet 'cause they know it's Hollywood, after all, and they know Harvey will be back and he'll be looking for revenge. Better Harvey should just make nice, go to some rehab, go through the usual motions, then make his comeback. He will. It's Hollywood. Appearance is everything.
5
No he should be banned from ever going back to his company which he shared with his brother. Like Roger Ailes before him. He shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a movie studio again. Therapy won't help.
1
This is just political theatre crisis management, he will still be around to harass others.
4
How many producers in Hollywood have done what Mr Weinstein is accused of as a matter within the fabric of the major film business ..prior to perhaps the 1970's ... let me see ?? I think it may be perhaps 99%....NYT I agree with you on most things ,, but on this YOU ARE WAY OFF BASE AND WRONG,, Doesn't make it right, BUT ,,consider the context..
3
A spectacular fall
1
Hollywood may be quiet, but it was up to the likes of Colbert, Fallon, Meyers, Corden, Conan, Noah (at least he mentioned it), Maher (who had more than a day to prepare) and NBC's Saturday Night (two-plus days) to shout about it....and failed miserably!!! Oh, and Lorne Michaels using "It's a New York thing" as an excuse when - as we all know - the president is from Couer d'Alene
9
Loren Michaels is the master of hypocrisy on this from as is all of those talking heads you mentioned. Always different. Always.
This went on for three decades and the company and the board was aware and let it persist. Now that the NOBLE company and the board have been shamed, they NOW want nothing to do with Harvey but theu are equally to blame for the abuse. Shame on all of them.
10
It will be great if the long-term effect of this scandal is to end Hollywood's culture of the "casting couch".
5
And, by the way, why should everyone give the money donated back. This is not filthy lucre; it was money earned from a very successful business. I honestly don't know why, except in a knee jerk, politically correct reaction, these funds should be returned. And then just how far back should people go to return the money? I mean, he's been rich and powerful for quite a long time and apparently carried on as he did for quite a long time. Yes, he's tainted, but the money isn't .
4
Reading this article reminded me of Maureen Dowd claiming that she had known Donald Trump for three decades. She wrote a chatty column about him and let everyone know she was on the inside.
Then when the evidence against Mr. Trump begin to pile up, she all of a sudden had an epiphany and realized that he was a bad guy after all.
Why are we so slow to react and acknowledge the bad behavior of those we supposedly know well? We know it is wrong, and yet we turn our heads or just walk away. I began thinking about this when it came to light that some Catholic priests were given a pass for molesting young children.
I don't have a good answer, but I see this sad story play out across society and political parties.
5
It's hard to believe Meryl Streep was unaware of Weinstein's sleazy behavior. I'm just a middle-aged nobody from Illinois and I heard these allegations over a decade ago.
12
Joan Rivers once said that every successful actress had had to do sexual favours to get started. She emphasized "everyone". I really don't know if Joan was being honest or sensational. But I've looked at every actor and actress differently since then.
2
Hard to believe? Actually, its an impossibility....
5
Ridiculous statement Marcus. Impossibility is an absolute, like the sun setting in the east tomorrow. This is not an impossibility.
We need a movie as good as "Spotlight" to tell this sordid, drawn-out story. So many parallels.
3
Hard to believe Harvey Weinstein is thought of as a very big donor, yet recipients of his donations are giving only $5-6,000 to charity. Either he wasn't really that big a donor or they're not giving to charity all that he gave them.
If a Harvey Weinstein gives, say, $200,000 to a SuperPAC and, say, $5,000 to a candidate, and that Super PAC then gives $200,000 to the candidate, has Harvey Weinstein given $5,000 to the candidate, or $205,000?
It amazes me how people can politicize this!!!
This isn't a Republican/Democrat issue - this is a Powerful Guy issue!
This abuse of power has happened for years, regardless of political affiliation!
Obviously MOST men don't behave as Harvey, O'Reilly, Cosby, Ailes have.
Certainly plenty in Hollywood have - the 'casting couch' has gone on for years and years. And many people - both men AND women - have supposedly gotten jobs from sleeping with a boss/someone in power.
To be fair - even though Ashley Judd had a terrible experience with Harvey in his hotel room, she still went on to star in two of his movies! So as gross as he was, even though she declined his advances, he still gave her jobs. And she took them.
It's a peculiar world, to say the least.
7
Waiting for Matt Damon to take a public stand. Without Weinstein, he and Ben Affleck wouldn't have careers. You think Damon would have grown more by now, given his public support for various causes. Damon is generally viewed as a good guy. From Damon's MIT Commencement speech last year: "And that’s what I want to urge you to do today: turn toward the problems you see. And don’t just turn toward them. Engage with them. Walk right up to them, look them in the eye ... then look yourself in the eye and decide what you’re going to do about them."
5
@Mike: Keep waiting. Damon and Affleck do not want to revive the rumors surrounding the authorship of their Oscar winning screenplay "Good Will Hunting."
2
If every guy who ever harassed women can no longer donate to political parties, it might just solve the role of money in politics.
5
@Cornflower Rhys
Bravo! Brilliant....
3
Why is the world so surprised by this revelation? We are all aware of the "casting couch" ritual with all producers. Save your daughter's from this industry.
4
Hollywood's elite including the people so quick to lecture Hard Working Americans are strangely silent... Np SNL skit ; no Colbert lecture , no crying Jimmy. Perhaps Colberts expression should be applied to the elite's who called this man a hero. Perhaps Obama and Clinton should refund some of the donated money like a few of the lesser lights.
4
I am struggling to figure out what hard working Americans were lectured in these examples?
1
There is no industry or organization that can expect that men in a position of power won't abuse that power and abuse women in their organization (or abuse men, as in the case of the recently removed Arkansas judge).
So this shouldn't be a loberal thing or a conservative thing. Fox News looks almost like it's sequentially firing every man in the company, and people are happy and the liberal wing of the entertainment industry is loud in their joy.
The right-wing entertainers like Rush are having their fun now. But if the liberals in entertainment and elsewhere would clean their own house, Rush would have nothing to latch onto.
2
Why is Weinstein's (also) famous wife not given a single mention in any of these articles at nytimes? I just looked at 5 different articles and always the omission that Weinstein is married and to Georgina Chapman is odd. One wonders if the omission is intentional editorially at this point.
11
And odd to that in her appearances on Project Runway All Stars she was always, I mean always as in it must have been in the contract, as "the gorgeous Georgina Chapman." That always struck me as odd.
1
Perhaps it would hurt her brand. She is co-founder of Marchesa
1
To we of the general public, this is a new revelation but to the members of the industry this is old news.
So why no reaction by the members of the industry prior to this point in time why such a moralistic reaction now and not when they first knew.
Could it be just an act of public relations and not private contrition.
And who knew that Hollywood even had such concern for individual morality in a liberal stronghold where assuming moralistic positions is considered an anathema. Where live and let live and not comment is the mantra.
12
PR and not PC? Ya' think?
Amazing. "Liberals" always take immediate action and The Con Don is still lurking around OUR white house.
Propaganda really works on "liberals and progressives" and is usually engineered by rabid Robber Barons who want to get control. Wake Up, Americans.
11
I hope this is sarcasm, because those that surrounded themselves with HW took 3 decades to act.
9
Immediate action? He's been getting away with this for years.
11
Immediate action? He's been doing it for decades while everyone knew and did nothing.
Carlos Danger was leading in the polls for Mayor until he had a "relapse" and Bill was re-elected after sexually abusing an intern in his control.
9
Everyone in the film industry has known about Harvey Weinstein for decades. Everyone in the film industry is also well aware of the ubiquitous use of the casting couch, and aware of which men in power routinely use it. This includes powerful box office draw actors who often demand that another cast member be designated as their "comfort" cast member for the duration of filming.
And it should be mentioned here that the ONLY reason that Weinstein is finally being held up as the poster boy for this environment, and held accountable, is that he is finally vulnerable due to a fading star - his last few "Oscar bait" films have bombed, doing only moderately well at the box office and failing to get the kind of either cult or glittering recognition that "Shakespeare In Love" and "Pulp Fiction".
It is because his own star is fading that the wagons aren't circling around him.
Believe me: in Hollywood, money and box office success still supersede other considerations. Weinstein is finally vulnerable on those fronts, and, therefore, finally vulnerable on other fronts.
96
None of us doubt that, Elizabeth. Rich, powerful film mogul uses power and prestige to get attractive actresses to participate in questionable, sexual activities. Haven't we seen this movie?
1
"often demand that another cast member be designated as their "comfort" cast member for the duration of filming"
I had never heard that.
2
...so, if we can get off out tweet epidemic addiction, will the wagons eventually circle tRUMP?
1
I am liberal in most respects, conservative in other respects. Of course I do have to vote Democrat because I would rather put up with some liberal flaws than all the Republican nonsense. The Democrats better give back or give away every last nickel that this sick, lecherous man gave them.
14
One thing that's become clear in these cases (Ailes, Weinstein et al) is that companies don't act because they are worried about the well-being of women. They act when they are worried that enough information about the abuse is public that the company will be legally held responsible (e.g. through lawsuits) for the behavior of abusive men. If the man has a well-established pattern and the company knows about it, the company is liable. And that is where the pressure can be applied. Please keep it up, journalists, and dig into this stuff. You are the paper trail in a world in which powerful men are trying to hide their tracks. And it is the paper trail (and not any abstract sense of right and wrong) that makes all the difference.
241
Haha, don't be too grateful to the Times' journalists for this story; it's several decades too late. These allegations about Weinstein have been common knowledge forever.
One of the sickening side stories here is the late resignation of board member Paul Tudor Jones, a well known investor and former member of the University of Virginia Board of Visitors. Jones started Just Capital to identify companies that are doing good and promoting social justice. Although Weinstein's misconduct was evidently common knowledge to insiders like Jones, it took a crashing wall of 2x4s to conclude that just maybe this firm was the antithesis of everything he claims to support. Rank and duplictious hypocrites, nearly all of them.
26
I've met Paul Tudor Jones many years ago, and from my experience he was and still is an upstanding citizen. In fact I've also my Harvey, and from what I observed, these two men couldn't be more different from one another. Enough said.
3
If Tudor Jones was not a victim of Weinstein's behavior but was aware of it and did nothing to stop it, he's not as upstanding a citizen as you say. Sadly, it seems that female victims speaking up are not taken seriously until they number 40, 50 or more. Perhaps it will be only when other men in powerful positions make it clear that this criminal behavior is not acceptable, that it will finally stop.
3
The Good Deeds of this man are not overshadowed by the evil Deeds of another . while apparently this person was trying to do what is perceived as right and correct he is not his brother's keeper and Weinstein is not even his brother.
You know it's bad when Democrat politicians start giving donations back.
39
It's fun to watch them scurrying for cover...
1
I find it very very hypocritical that the Hollywood elite want to blast others outside the industry and not taking positions verbally or written on this issue. Reason? Because they have been living this lie for years among themselves and protecting abusers. Many are all sexual predators to degrees, male or female. They pretend to be the voice of the oppressed and somehow better. What baloney! They love going after those that are not part of their liberal thoughts or part of their network. Ugly to see and now revealing.
47
They live their lives by pretending to be someone other than themselves. They know very little but have a lot to say....
2
Probably the hardest thing for Harvey Weinstein is that he doesn't get to say "Yeah, but Clinton" the way naughty Republicans do. It won't even help him much to point out how throughout Hollywood history movie moguls have been blatantly come on to by ambitious wannabes who seemingly didn't mind a little casting couch if it meant a cushy contract.
It's interesting, though. If he'd been caught embezzling studio funds, he might have been defended as was the late David Begelman. But sexual harassment? In this day and age? You're gone.
5
The idea that some man who is powerful and makes money in the movies is "gone" as a result of acts of sexual aggression against women, and for threatening their ability to make a living is absolutely UNTRUE. The responder who suggested that Weinstein is finally accountable because his movies have started to fail is far more realistic than the idea that somehow Hollywood as changed. Get real.
1
goodbye gone take the other low lifes with you and PLEASE don't come back...!
6
So it was a matter of money over morality. Gee, I wonder what would have happened if some of those 8 women who received settlements had actually done the right thing and outed him instead of accepting cash to keep their mouths shut. Perhaps they could have saved countless women from experiencing the same predatory behavior if they had put the good of others in front of getting a big payout. I don't respect them AT ALL.
24
Well, at least one woman, Ambra Battilana, did go to the police. The cops corroborated most of her story with audio evidence, but Cyrus Vance, the DA, declined to prosecute, supposedly because she was deemed a noncredible witness (Vance later received a 10,000 contribution from Weinstein's lawyer, David Boies).
The Times really ought to reach out to these women and determine how many went to the cops /prosecutors only to be ignored—and name the DA's who failed to do their job.
2
Before you get too self-righteous, maybe you need to know how real life in the corporate world works. Most of these victims were in low-paying positions at the start of their careers (even the actresses Ashley Judd and Rose McGowan). Had they not agreed to confidentiality agreements as part of their settlements (which are standard requirements in most settlements -- including personal injury suits, not just sex harassment suits) in order to get the settlements and move on. More importantly, had they blown the whistle at that point in their career, Mr. Weinstein, with his army of well-paid lawyers and public relations people, would have destroyed these women's careers before they ever got started. Even now, look at how many people vilify the women who have spoken up about Bill Cosby. Because Weinstein was powerful, and his accusers were then unknown and not powerful, most people would have questioned the credibility of these women, and circled the wagons supporting him. Look at how many people ignored the accusations against Arnold Schwarzenegger before he became Governor of California, or the current occupant of the White House.
15
Forgive me, but who cares? Harvey Weinstein and his kind make mediocrities like Ashley Judd internationally famous and rich beyond all deserts. No one is complaining about *that* injustice....
And for Times' readers who think being asked to perform a massage or watch an ogre shower is the worst thing that happens in working life, try the life-long indignities of Walmart, which are enshrined and protected by law.
How easily the sensibilities of the over-fed are vicariously bruised....
23
jrd, to answer your rhetorical question: I care.
It's not an either/or. It's possible, even logical, to care about Weinstein's and Walmart's abuse of people who have less power and money than they have.
Abuse of power is bad, whether it takes place in Hollywood or at the mall.
3
Interesting that SNL shelved skits on this very subject. I guess it's open season on republican conservatives but nothing where their own business is concerned. The hypocrisy never ceases to surprise me where the liberal progs are concerned, only they never see it in themselves.
65
Unfortunately, it just isn't funny. I don't remember any gropper skits either.
What Weinstein did to women is inexcusable. The same with guys like Bill Cosby and Bill O'Reilly. Even O.J. Simpson.
I still remember the feminism movement in this country. Then I turn on the TV and see Shania Twain twisting upside down in some Amazonian warrior fantasy.
Then I see women serving as arm pieces at high society parties.
Women need to empower themselves, but a lot of times they sell out to the guy with the nice car and huge bank account.
23
There will be more like Henry Weinstein. What bothers me is why women keep going after these guys knowing well at some point they are most likely to experience the kind of bevaviour Weinstein has exhibited
10
Weinstein: "an advocate for women."
Trump: "Nobody has more respect for women than I do,"
It's a thing. Claiming the opposite of who you are.
President Trump told reporters on Saturday that he had known Mr. Weinstein “for a long time” and was “not at all surprised to see” the reports.
Not at all surprising that one recognizes another member of the club. And since Trump likes childish Tweets - "It takes one to know one."
19
I have a lot of sisters and a daughter. It sickens me to see that this exploitative behavior could be tolerated for 30 thirty years. But, better late than never. let this be a lesson to louts who think their position of wealth and power allows them to treat women as objects to be exploited. And let this be a lesson to high and mighty Hollywood: you need to clean house on exploitation or women and with drug addiction. Stop looking the other way. As an industry, you bear responsibility for the safety of your workers.
11
And yet Trump is still in office.
23
I am shocked! Shocked! What? No words of condemnation from POTUS about Weinstein's misogynistic behavior, like "He's a LOSER!" "Made TERRIBLE movies!" "Paid TOO much! Bad deal, VERY bad deal!" Where is the Twitter "outrage" from POTUS we have come to expect. So disappointing....
16
The male boar comes in all political persuasions. Most aren't fortunate, as I was, to have women approach them. And they never learn how to effectively communicate with the opposite sex or to treat them as equals, or even, as it often is with beautiful, powerful, independent women, as MORE than equals.
Any man who thinks a woman owes him something simply because he’s a man is a fool. Any man who buys the "weaker sex" lie is an idiot. Evolution would never make the weaker sex responsible for the continuation of a species; for that species would perish off the face of the earth in short order. The female of the species is far stronger than the male because nature demands it. We're like the male of a dioecious plant species. Once we release our pollen, they don't need us. (Fortunately, they're kind enough to keep us around.) Men need to learn to accept this basic truth: women are at least our equals. They are our partners, and allies in the great game of life -- not window dressing. And they deserve RESPECT!
18
Wonderful to hear it like it is! Thank you!!!
2
The same Hollywood that could have cared less about President Bill Clinton's lies and extramarital proclivities and donated millions to him.
33
I think a couple of extramarital Affairs do not Merit the same type of uproar as someone forcing themselves upon people over and over again. The extramarital affair of Bill Clinton was between Bill Clinton and his wife and whoever the third party happened to be.
3
Getting fired and out of work, plus getting all the money he donated back sounds like a retirement package made in heaven. Time, money and perhaps his health. Who could ask for more. Harvey should just wipe his feet of the place and leave Lisa and her friends to wallow in it for themselves.
2
After decades of harassment and multiple payoff, he was fired? He wasn't fired because of the behavior. He was fired because he got caught and embarrassed the company. For shame!
39
So the liberal icon Meryl Streep refers to Weinstein as "God" and SNL gives him a pass as a courtesy to a fellow New Yorker. Only after four days of mocking criticism does Streep find the intestinal fortitude to call Weinstein out for what he is, a misogynist creep. All of this, including enabling Weinstein by willingly looking the other way, comes to you from a Hollywood that purports to be a bastion of liberalism, but panders to the mass's baser instincts with a steady diet of violence, sex and vulgarity. It strikes me that the emperor has no clothes.
17
SNL taking the safe route out and Lorne Michaels, you've got to be kidding: " ..New Yorker's don't talk about New Yorkers." Could I hazard a guess, that the myopic Mr. Michaels missed the news that Anthony Weiner jail time.
Graydon Carter run for cover.
Robert Whittaker
Burlington, Ontario, Canada
11
How Weinstein gets fired and Trump gets voted president for the same transgressions all boils down to independent board members at their companies.
4
Equating speech with actions is pretty moronic!
It’s likely not just speech...
Well, the liberal line on why women didn’t speak out sooner about Harvey Weinstein is out, they felt alone and powerless. Except, eight of them had enough power to sue him, take his money and sign an agreement to keep their mouths shut. They weren’t powerless, they were greedy. Instead of protecting other women from a creep who harassed them they took the money and ran.
I say this not to excuse Weinstein or disparage his victims but to point out that we must stop seeing these things in Manichean terms, we need to stop creating angels and devils and admit that despite our identities we are all flawed. It is unjust to declare that we should always believe women now because men are devils who love to harass women and women are angels who never lie.
If we are going to create a system where women are protected from men like Weinstein and men are protected from false accusations we should admit that both are valid goals and we are all capable of good and evil.
We might want to start with finding a way to stop powerful people from using lawsuits to buy silence. There is something insidious about making plaintiffs sign confidentiality agreements.
Or we can do what we always do, wait for the story to fade, and do nothing.
18
Just as every sentient member of the Republican party, the news and entertainment media and his business associates must have known that Donald Trump had unseemly, at best, attitudes toward women well before the Access Hollywood tapes, so, too, did anyone who was paying any attention at all know about Harvey Weinstein's reputation of harassment well before this report was released. Reporting on his reputation was not actually news. Why the report wasn't written 4 or 5 years ago is a mystery. Perhaps because his money gave him the power to clamp the mouths of most of Hollywood. Now, without requiring courage, many seem eager to express their outrage. That money also clamped shut the mouths of the entertainment news media that profited from his empire. Now that he is a taint to the brand, and unprofitable, they distance themselves. It is the report, not the harassment, that provoked this.
Most importantly for our democracy, Weinstein's money also clamped shut the mouths of the entire Democratic party, for whom he was a goldmine. Some, who must have known years ago that he was a pig, are now righteously giving money they received from him to charity. How dignified. The continuing silence from former and current leaders of the DNC, as well as from former president Obama and from the Clintons is deafening. Perhaps that is because they knew for years and did nothing.
9
The other day I was on a conference call with a bunch of male partners. All of the male partners have "misbehaved" at times; tantrums, attitude, tit for tat.
The dysfunction was such that I went through a careful process of validating the source of the disputes and attempted to have a civil call. One of our partners decided to take out all of the frustration he had been feeling towards the two misbehavers---directly on me. I stepped one degree to the side and I got slammed down; meanwhile these other two bozos have been on the margins for months.
But you know what? I. Have. Had. Enough.
I said something. Called him out for "manrupting" and "mansplaining". Decided not to swallow bile at work any more.
You know what inspired me? My rage towards this Harvey Weinstein story. My cupeth has simply runneth over with the misogyny in the workplace.
It has to stop.
21
If this were a POTUS or a POTUS supporter or employee there would be a thousand comments here -- where is everyone? Where is Meryl Streep and Robert DiNero? Are they hitting this head on like they did with POTUS? I guess not because this guy admitted he has issues and has been fired... okay.. I think I answered my own question - not sure....
9
Perhaps he did not molest Meryl Streep or Robert De Niro? Perhaps they don't have the facts that they need to mount a battle against this man. That is a silly argument
2
Reading over his statement, Weinstein's only regret seems to be that he was caught. He is clearly an inveterate bully and abuser who was given a pass by the Hollywood "elite" owing to his power and his liberal views. One can only wonder whether he will be target of outrage at the next Emmy or Oscar event, but I suspect not.
8
It has been known for decades that the Hollywood culture views young women as "Prey." This is entirely consistent with the pay differential and the ethos that says a woman is washed up and unemployable at 35 or if she gains 15 pounds.
This looks just like the gun control debate, people will go "That's Terrible!" and carry on as before. After all, there is an endless supply of women looking for fame and glory, as I said - Prey.
13
Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men? The Shadow knows!
The New York Times isn't a shadow but a beacon uncovering one in a long list of Hollywood misdeeds. The casting couch is, and always has been, alive and well in Hollywood. Harvey Weinstein's crime is that he got caught--almost all serial sexual predators who cover-up their monstrous dalliances by paying hush money do. An all-male board of directors at Weinstein's company practically codifies it and solidifies the male dominance in the film industry starting from the very top all the way down through the trades.
The real test will be to see what happens next. Will more actresses come forward against other members of Hollywood’s executives? Which wayward studio exec will be caught next week? Will AMPAS, the governing body of the Oscars revoke Weinstein's membership? Will AMPAS distance themselves by withholding upcoming Academy event invitations from Weinstein?
Stay tuned!
6
So where are the calls for boycotting the company ?
where is "the resistance" ?
where is the prime time news coverage on ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN ?
oh, how silly of me.
Weinstein backed Hillary and liberal causes, so we don't want too much publicity.
29
While I do not believe anyone of right mind condones the behavior of Weinstein - or any other sexual predator (like the one living in the WH) - the difference I note between progressives and conservatives who engage in this type of behavior is that the progressive is not engaging in this behavior while preaching (yes, I used that word on purpose) to all how they should live their lives, how they should 'worship', and how they should be pro-life because the bible tells us so. I think both the 'behavior' and the 'preaching' are reprehensible.
4
How could a board fire the man who started the company ran the company and owned with his relatives a large part of it.
He was I believe fired in name only.
Unless he was forced to sell his interest in the company he and his brother I believe probably own more of the company than anyone else and do control the board.
If I am right than this "firing" means nothing which makes sense as the company without him has no reason to exist as he is a integral part of the business.
I
4
He shares a 42% ownership with his brother, I believe.
His being fired prevents him from working for or acting on behalf of the company. That's how it should work, anyway.
3
I read in the Times he and his brother only own 42 %
1
You might recall Apple technically fired co-founder Steve Jobs in the mid-80s.
2
It's been called the worst kept secret in Hollywood.
Obviously the media knew all about it for decades but didn't expose it either.
The media are all complicit in this, protecting one of their own.
Interesting this comes out now, after Weinstein gave many more millions to Hillary's and other Dems' campaigns. Only after the last penny was extracted for the last election, the hammer falls.
"The Democrats are giving Harvey’s money back,” I highly doubt that. They'll be taking it in the future, too. The media lose even more credibility as well.
26
Another one (sexual predator) bites the dust!
6
Long past overdue and justly deserved, for the Weinstein's, Ailes, Cosby's, O'Reilly's of our age be called out publicly and absolutely humiliated. Lord only knows how many more chameleons in our big-headed age of media, with billion dollar bank accounts but seriously bankrupt character, lurk in our midst.
But, what astounds me perhaps even more about these creeps, are the numbers of enablers these men employed, convinced, bought, and to keep, both the ingenue pipeline going forever, and, a well-oiled lid on their dirty little secrets of criminal sexual impropriety. Saddest of all- knowing our children are watching, seeing with their own eyes, far too many ugly truths about supposedly upstanding adults. Adults who are very, very, very wealthy.
Not so good.
6
This is the least that should have happened. Hollywood will go back to trying its hardest to generate Oscar buzz over its movies this fall and winter, but with the help of the IMDb, I'll skip any movie with Harvey Weinstein in its credits no matter how much buzz is attached to it.
4
On the one hand, I am glad to hear HW was fired. On the other, why didn't this happen sooner? His company knew or should have known he was sexually harassing women based on, if nothing else, all the settlements they were having to pay out. How sad and disgusting they only did this only after they were publicly shamed.
7
Isn't the real scandal the fact that the Hollywood mogul was able to operate with impunity in the entertainment industry despite plenty of rumors of his corrupt practices? Isn't the real reason he was ousted an internal power struggle in the family business, and the sexual abuse was an excuse for his ouster? Does power in the industry mean that responsible parties are rewarded for looking the other way, including the New York Times? To what degree does tribalism encourage abuse?
7
H.W. is a real piece of work. What is the old saying? "I am powerful, I want to do it and no person can/will stop me"
Sound like someone else you read about.
3
I love how he was only fired after it became public. They knew all along. I guess it's alright, as long as no one knows about it??? The Weinstein Co. looks even worse now.
155
Totally agree-now fire the Donald
2
"They knew all along."
There is no slightest doubt about that. I think there are thousands of settlements about people in power we do not know yet.
1
Every woman in the workplace has experienced this kind of behavior. Even those who reach top levels in their careers are afraid to speak out because of "backlash." Even now there are people taking names of those who've spoken out and making a note not to employ them in the future. It has gotten worse in recent decades, not better.
33
I never experienced it. So, kudos to all of the guys with whom and for whom I worked who never did it. Not all men do this, you know.
3
I never did either though I certainly heard some frustrating feedback (one that comes to mind, when I was a peer to several male regional sales managers, from a new boss looking at my resume, “what a relief, I thought you were going to turn out to be a glorified secretary”, errrrr). But I have worked in a very male dominated industry (aerospace) and definitely, not all men do this.
2
Abuse of power, influence and position has dominated recorded history. The most egregious infractions occur when men, women and children are forced against their will to endure the heinous behavior of others. But when the victim can choose to accept the abuse or walk away with a "No"... I ask "Why?"
Every woman I know has at one time or another been propositioned by their employer, a co-worker, a teacher... even contractors working on their home projects. I worked at a Fortune 5 corporation for 30 years. A year didn't go by where a man in a "superior" position to mine offered me help to move my career along in exchange for "favors" of one kind or another. "No" is the operative word. I retired at the highest professional level achievable for my career path... "No" is the operative word.
36
It seems that these women did say "NO". But the reason they didn't talk about it, or sue is because they were afraid of the backlash. You said "No" also but did you bring sexual harassment claims? If not then why? Perhaps you understood that rejecting those advances is one thing but going public with the accusations is another.
9
Yes, I brought the two most blatant cases to the attention of my management. Action was taken.
3
Emme (Sante Fe): You are correct that the operative word should be 'NO' and we as women should expose these pigs. But the heart of this issue is that women are to often forced to either accept this behavior or 'find another job or career' (as if jobs just grow on trees ripe for the plucking). This is not freedom and it costs us the ability to pursue work of our own choosing, life time earnings, rank & position, etc. Also, in this particular case, going against someone who has millions for legal costs. We should say No and fight back...but don't undermine those who feel they can't. Address those who feel empowered to do harm to satisfy their own egos.
3
I give credit to Bob Weinstein, Mr. Maerov, and any others at the company for taking action and acknowledging that there was a real problem.
And more importantly, for coming out against Lisa Bloom!
Much more outrage and criticism is deserved in her direction for her planned attacks against the women who spoke out against Harvey Weinstein.
Shame on you, Lisa Bloom. Shame on you.
62
how long have they known about his behavior or did they know. any how let him takes his knocks.
3
And thanks to NYT!
2
C'mon?! Credit to Bob Weinstein and ilk for knowing the truth and helping hide it for decades until it became "financially" inconvenient for them? No kudos to them. The abuse and cover-up would have continued if it hadn't become obvious to them that they could no longer get away with. I really hope this is a sign that times are finally changing, but I won't hold my breath. This only proves that money talks. Bob Weinstein, the Hollywood establishment, the silent stars (Meryl Streep and her very belated and useless excuse included) only act when their bank account is involved.
So disappointed in the continued cowardly silence (where are you - Paltrow, Clooney, SNL, Hilary?) and lame excuses from those such as Streep. How much more money do you need in your bank account to feel you can speak for what is right?
2
Havey Weinstein controlled and directed the careers of women. He greenlit pictures, influenced casting decisions, then allegedly engaged in deviate sexual practices including making unwanted advances, fondling, groping, masturbating in full of his victim, and who knows what else. It appears this was a pattern. His motivation was sexual gratification, the soothing of his low self esteem, and his ability to use the power of his position to get what he wanted, with impunity.
The other equally disturbing pattern was Hollywood's willingness, en masse it appears, to "look the other way".
Weinstein, when accused or confronted by his various victims, paid them off to shut them up.
This is as much a reflection on Harry Weinstein as it is an indictment of other men, in power, working in the same industry, who allowed this to go. Pretty sad day.
26
"Weinstein Fired, Trump Hired,"
Would have been the likely headline had this come to light last November's election season.
Welcome to America, land of hypocrisy, lies and the power to keep it that way.
24
The sound of silence is more damning to a community and its collective consciousness than any act of civil or criminal misbehavior. A life lived well is worth more than any amount of money in the bank. The business of Hollywood is one of utter indifference to the sanctity of human dignity. They can’t make this stain disappear. It has become part of their fabric. That, folks, is showbiz.
36
Hollywood is experiencing an earthquake that is looong overdue. The same faces that have set themselves up as power brokers are STILL deciding what movies are made. It turns out those decisions have been made over and over again by self important small men with sexual addiction problems. I'm sure this is not an isolated case. Is it any wonder why women are portrayed in movies as diminished and in the shadow of the men?
I shudder to think of the brilliant films that could have been made from some different perspectives had the decision makers been more diverse. It's time to sweep out the trash of a former era and embrace the possibilities that are now presenting themselves. A good start would be to replace some of those board members that resigned with some women.
26
I agree with most of your comment but not sure about the sexual addiction, I suspect the men are shallow with fragile egos and it comes out as bullies and brutes. I doubt that they enjoy either sex or women and compensate by rape and control
2
Weinstein's firing for his salacious behavior was justified and quick. Please explain to me why an occupant of the White House who's past is equally as despicable, is allowed to continue in his position. A position with much more influence than Weinsten? Sad that the private sector holds employees to a higher standard than our elected politicians.
112
You cannot be serious!! Bet you voted for Bill Clinton, the worse female abuser to ever live in the WH
1
Well, he was impeached, but it really wasn't because of the conduct so much as his lying under oath about it. But agreed, this kind of behavior is deplorable from any person, elected or not, Democrat or Republican.
1
Finally, all the hard work done by so many women over so,many years is starting to topple the abusive men. This is the tip of the pile. Stay tuned more to come.
35
Wasn't giving money and support to women's groups and liberal causes the method Hugh Hefner used to divert attention away from some of the less savoury aspects of his enterprises and practices at the Playboy Mansion? Let's not forget that the mansion was a venue for more than one of Bill Cosby's alleged trysts.
46
Republicans are complaining that Weinstein is just as bad as Bill O'Reilly or Donald Trump. Very true! They should all be fired.
146
And Bill Clinton was impeached for lying under oath about his sexual situation with an intern in the Oval Office.
3
Bill Clinton lied to a Federal Grand Jury. If you or I did that we'd be in jail. Clinton stayed in office.
1
The fact that the Weinstein Company had what the article describes as an "all-male board" may help explain why the company looked the other way as Harvey Weinstein settled case after case of sexual harassment. They need to start by filling some of their board vacancies with female directors and considering hiring a woman to replace Harvey Weinstein as head of the company.
46
They just found out?! Please. People both within and outside TWC knew but didn't do anything because he was rich and powerful and he made a then rich. The only company policy he violated was he got caught. Thank you NYT.
126
Thank you NYT, for what? The Times has known about this behavior for years. Me thinks the story was squashed to protect a lucrative advertising stream.
1
Interesting how few comments (1) there are to this article and that Hollywood is not talking. What is the story behind that?
48
That is very interesting isn't it. I bet there were many more comments here when the subject of the article was Roger Ailes or Bill O'Reilly. Most readers here are Democrats or further left so when it's one of there own exposed there is less vocal outrage.
14
I was waiting for Alec Baldwin to appear as a bloated Weinstein on SNL. Surprise, surprise he didn't show. Hmmm. What's the matter Alec too close to home for you and your Hollywood Elites?
14
It was 1993 and I had moved from Los Angeles to New York for a number of reasons and was looking for a position in my industry - the entertainment business. I went to Miramax excited to be accepted to interview to work with one of its leaders. The woman who prepped me for the interview perused my CV with years of experience and asked, "Can you take high pressure? " and then "Do you have the stomach for this?" I understood both remarks and told her, "Yes." Pretty sure I comprehended the undertones. Before accepting the job I spoke with other people familiar with Miramax. They told me about Mir-Anon, composed of a group of current and former employees who met periodically to deal with the affects of abuse - harassment and other cruelties - meted out leadership there. I declined the job - alway feeling like a I missed a great opportunity for the wrong reasons----.
69
This pathetic episode should be a movie of the week. Working title:
Profiles in Cowardice - How Hollywood Turned a Blind Eye to the Sexually Criminal Acts of Harvey Weinstein.
36
About time! I'm reaching the point where I assume that many men in power harass women, either sexually or financially or emotionally, just because they can. Harvey Weinstein and his ilk aren't so much older than myself so I cannot understand how they "evolved" to this point in life. I was brought up to expect equal, respectful treatment for men and women and stupidly assumed that those lessons stuck with all of us. Silly me.
12
"Everybody" knew for years but tyhat's Hollywood. But what about journalism, which used to be considered a glamour field. Many decades ago I was in my mid-20s and applied for a reporter's on the women's pages of The iami News (long since defunct). My final inerview was withthe paper's edior, national nationally known figure in journalism, then in his early 20s. After about 15 minutes of chattering, he told me a "tryout" was required and named an evening time at an offsite location
I was stunned, agreed and never showed up. I was devastated for about two weeks and then found an excellent position in public relations which sometimes entailed working with young women reporters from The Miami News. I looked at those women who had the job I wanted and wondered: did she or didn't she?
87
Gee, who knew about this freak Weinstein?
Well, the DEMs all knew because they vet who gives them and bundles their big money, right?
They knew and took the money, just as they gave to and covered for Bill Clinton.
Now they cry "foul", oh horrors! They are all, as Michael Corleone said, "part of the same hypocrisy".
What lying frauds!
30
Typical man behavior. Good for you for not falling for it.
8
"Show Business," is mostly "business." Since when in business is anything particularly fair? Stronger companies routinely ruin competitors into abject poverty every single day.
Weinstein can put out an offer, and women can always just say no. Is it the offer they resent, or the fact that they have to say no? His offer is rejected, and they have to move on. It's really like anything else in business, except for the sex part, which is why it is covered by the NYT so extensively.
There is nothing new here.
1