The Ugly Harvey Weinstein Moment

We think it’s probably a Good Thing that the casting couch has finally been explicitly criminalized. It always tended that way.  Take a look at coercion in the second degree – a class E felony in New York – and tell us what you think.  Come to think of it, why wasn’t this also charged in the whole Weinstein thing?  Was it?

But – and we’re so defense minded here at LoS that there’s always a “but” – we’re disturbed by at least one aspect of the treatment of Mr. Weinstein: ridiculing his physical characteristics, such as Weinstein being “ugly” and a “monster” and even possessing a “disgusting penis“.

Why disturbed?  There have to be limits on just how much scorn and obloquy we can heap upon the designated criminal of the day.  The man has been felled from a very high perch, his life ruined and he’s off to prison, because he did terrible things and we agree they were terrible.

But that’s enough.  Piling on in the fashion that so many already have is uncivilized.  Our collective judgment of his guilt is not a license for cruelty.

And we should not be so easy on ourselves.  Who among us has not seen a Miramax film, or any other movie for that matter, without being at least dimly aware that the “industry” producing the films had this sordid side?  There have been a lot of Harvey Weinsteins.  And to a significant degree that’s on us.

And episode like this should prompt some circumspection, some self-searching, not an orgy of shockingly cruel abuse heaped upon such an easy target.



Filed under Media incompetence/bias

2 responses to “The Ugly Harvey Weinstein Moment

  1. Keythong

    The women accepted this for decades, and said very little until recently, so they are guilty too, and mostly just out to get solipsistic revenge for consented behaviour and behaviour they failed to complain about decades earlier (i.e. they voluntarily prostituted themselves to depraved men); this me-too hamster acting-out is really arising from men’s failure to stop the rise of the shit-test, become cultural cancer, of feminism.


    • Well, that’s one take on the whole thing. Not without merit, but I’d say not the definitive take either.

      The reason I mentioned coercion is that the facts fit pretty snugly into that, and coercion is a traditional crime. It’s akin to blackmail, where the “victim” might not be an innocent, but even so there are steep social costs to setting the floor of moral behavior so low that people can profit from exposing the secret sins of others.

      It’s a traditional crime, but hard to prosecute because the victim could be seen as being as guilty or more guilty than the accused. Same problem here, which you have pointed out.

      I think powerful men in the film industry exploiting their position to obtain sexual favors from aspiring actresses is contemptible behavior. The implicit threats are always there, and the actresses, even should they succumb, are probably more innocent than the typical blackmail victim.

      Thank you for the comment.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s