CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › Misogyny and the discrimination and abuse of women in the US and around the world
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Misogyny and the discrimination and abuse of women in the US and around the world - Page 34

post #1651 of 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambler View Post
 

 

No, but she wouldn't be welcome in men's rights groups either.  You don't have to hate the opposite sex to be poisonous to their cause.  

I don't know if I want to call male cheating an offense to all women everywhere. Or just him because of his activism?

post #1652 of 1839

Did you read Kai Cole's letter, Walt? 

post #1653 of 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waaaaaaaalt View Post
 

I don't know if I want to call male cheating an offense to all women everywhere. Or just him because of his activism?

 

It's more abstract than that.  Whedon was using his status as an uber feminist as not only a shield to cover his bad behavior, but as a calling card in order to get laid from female fans.  He made a mockery of feminism by hijacking it for his own purposes and damaging "the brand".  That's why they're pissed.  

post #1654 of 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boone Daniels View Post
 

Did you read Kai Cole's letter, Waaaaaaaalt? 

Yes. He fucked a bunch of people over 15 years and I don't think it's right, I just don't know if that means that everything he believes is a lie. Or maybe it does, im not sure. 

post #1655 of 1839

Also, what he did - taking advantage of his position as a creator of niche entertainment and as a director/writer with lots of eager, hungry actresses ready to work for him - was wrong. 

post #1656 of 1839
Originally Posted by Boone Daniels View Post
 

Also, what he did - taking advantage of his position as a creator of niche entertainment and as a director/writer with lots of eager, hungry actresses ready to work for him - was wrong. 

Well he very well could have done some kind of pressuring/harassment but thus far we have nothing. If that stuff comes out then he is really damned and he should be. I just read the Justice League thread, didn't know this was taking place over there, stupid me.

post #1657 of 1839

He admits as much in the letter he wrote his ex-wife

post #1658 of 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Happenin View Post

You either die a hero, or live long enough to become the villain http://www.thewrap.com/joss-whedon-feminist-hypocrite-infidelity-affairs-ex-wife-kai-cole-says/

Here beginneth the end of Whedon


uuugh.

 

I kind of have an issue with this. Now, I'm not going to go all #notallmen; I'm not trying to justify Whedon's behavior, or belittle his wife's opinion. Cheating and misleading your loved ones is a serious issue, one that can leave permanant scars on both parties.

 

I also feel like this is more of a personal grievance than something that needed to be shared on social media. Maybe the issue is less that Whedon has had affairs, and more that we, as consumers, have this issue of holding celebrities to be avatars of social justice when they're more like us than they let on.

post #1659 of 1839

As mentioned in the other thread, Kai Cole was, in all likelyhood, contacted by reporters who wondered why their marriage broke up (particularly surrounding the publicity he's gotten from Justice League) and before he could get "his side" out there, she felt it necessary to get out ahead of things. Particularly since Whedon has a tremendous gift of making himself look, always, like the wronged party. 

post #1660 of 1839
oooh that's a good point about beating Whedon to the punch in terms of establishing the narrative

TACTICAL
post #1661 of 1839

Yeah, God forbid anyone just tell reporters "It's none of your goddamn business.". Gotta get out in front and shape that break-up narrative.

post #1662 of 1839

I don't follow Whedon, but had he even commented on his divorce? If he didn't, then this speculation that he was revving up for a pity party is baseless.

post #1663 of 1839
How many threads are we going to talk about this in?
post #1664 of 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacob Singer View Post
 

Yeah, God forbid anyone just tell reporters "It's none of your goddamn business.". Gotta get out in front and shape that break-up narrative.

 

Indeed. I think the same thing happened between Pitt and Jolie with the abuse allegations that he was cleared of. It seems like these lawyers tell their rich, powerful clients to napalm the fuck out of their exes in the press just to get leverage and that is some ugly, ugly stuff.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradito View Post

How many threads are we going to talk about this in?

 

Every thread.

post #1665 of 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacknifeJohnny View Post
 

 

Indeed. I think the same thing happened between Pitt and Jolie with the abuse allegations that he was cleared of. It seems like these lawyers tell their rich, powerful clients to napalm the fuck out of their exes in the press just to get leverage and that is some ugly, ugly stuff.

 

Makes sense though. Do the most damage fast and loud. Push for a settlement to make it all go away.

post #1666 of 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradito View Post

How many threads are we going to talk about this in?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by JacknifeJohnny View Post
 

Every thread.

 

Joss Whedon is the Batman of adulterers. 

post #1667 of 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacknifeJohnny View Post
 

I don't follow Whedon, but had he even commented on his divorce? If he didn't, then this speculation that he was revving up for a pity party is baseless.

I don't think he's commented on it at all.  If he had, I assume sites would've picked it up pronto.

 

I don't think he was somehow itching to tell the story first.

 

But since he's the more prominent figure, he probably would've been asked about it at some point.  


And at that point, I have no idea what response he would've given.  I'd like to assume he would've simply given a curt confirmation and left it at that.  But given how flowery he can be with language, who knows?

post #1668 of 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacob Singer View Post
 

Yeah, God forbid anyone just tell reporters "It's none of your goddamn business.". Gotta get out in front and shape that break-up narrative.

And the thing is, I think she was someone in enough relative anonymity to be able to say that and then be left alone (unlike Pitt/Jolie)

 

I certainly didn't know who she was until this.

 

That's why I was cynical about the tactics behind whoever is representing her and how she feels about how the divorce finalized...

 

as well as that payback for 15 years of betrayal by not allowing his feminism shield to stand any longer.

post #1669 of 1839

The divorce is finalized and the chance of legal/financial blowback from airing dirty laundry is largely over.  She's decided to scorch the earth and get some measure of vengeance.  Can't say that I blame her, if he did what she says he did.

post #1670 of 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Overlord View Post
 

The divorce is finalized and the chance of legal/financial blowback from airing dirty laundry is largely over.  

Does that mean matters of custody has been finalized as well?

post #1671 of 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post
 

Does that mean matters of custody has been finalized as well?

If the divorce is closed/finalized, matters of custody would be finalized (otherwise it wouldn't be closed).   The kids are also in their late teens.  She played it pretty smart.  She waited until the legal proceedings were finished to ensure that it wouldn't poison the divorce proceedings against her (when minor children are involved judges really do not like the parties publicly smearing each other).   

post #1672 of 1839

Matters of custody are always open for new legal maneuvering, if one or both parents has the time, resources, and willing legal representation.

post #1673 of 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelM View Post
 

Matters of custody are always open for new legal maneuvering, if one or both parents has the time, resources, and willing legal representation.

 

True. But the risk is far less when there isn't an ongoing legal proceeding.  Both formal "gag orders" and informal practice really limits what you can say publicly in a pending divorce proceeding

post #1674 of 1839
Straight vengeance then.
post #1675 of 1839

As you said in the other thread, I am sympathetic to her vengeance (if that's indeed the primary drive)... but I also find the inclusion of a very general reference to the women (colleagues, friends, and fans) he may have had relationships with to be very questionable.

post #1676 of 1839
Exactly. She doesn't owe him shit, but in the coming days, she might owe a few women who have nothing to do with this an apology.
post #1677 of 1839
post #1678 of 1839
It remains to be seen whether the Whedon story has any legs or comes to define him. That AV Club piece, and the three (and counting) similar pieces over at The Mary Sue, are victory laps by people who have criticized Whedon's obvious fetish for injured waif characters for years now. I don't see signs that a lot of influential voices are changing their minds about Whedon yet, but maybe some of y'all who have your ears to the ground in Los Angeles have heard something that I haven't.
post #1679 of 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reasor View Post

That AV Club piece, and the three (and counting) similar pieces over at The Mary Sue, are victory laps by people who have criticized Whedon's obvious fetish for injured waif characters for years now. 

 

Nobody likes virtue signalling hypocrites.  

post #1680 of 1839
I'm absolutely on Team Victory Lap, don't get me wrong. I'm just thinking in terms of what lasting effect the story will have his ability to get work going forward. In a town where Polanski still gets standing ovations in absentia at award ceremonies, I think Whedon's going to come out smelling like a rose. Not that he's Polanski, in his crimes or in the quality of his art.
post #1681 of 1839

This is much more of a local LA thing, but some seriously nasty allegations just hit concerning two of the people who run the Cinefamily revival house.

 

https://www.facebook.com/katebrokaw/posts/10101051688235274

post #1682 of 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reasor View Post
 In a town where Polanski still gets standing ovations in absentia at award ceremonies....

 

Which is horrifying.


Edited by Overlord - 8/21/17 at 8:56pm
post #1683 of 1839

https://sports.yahoo.com/ambushed-judge-fires-back-shooter-steubenville-attack-213608769.html

 

EDIT: I didn't read the article properly. Apparently that judge has no connection to the case.....which is odd.

post #1684 of 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dent6084 View Post

This is much more of a local LA thing, but some seriously nasty allegations just hit concerning two of the people who run the Cinefamily revival house.

https://www.facebook.com/katebrokaw/posts/10101051688235274

I was just reading about this on Twitter. I've been there a million times. Not for the harassment, but for the movies.
post #1685 of 1839

So this is coming back. Wonder if it will stick now that Tig is the one bringing it up?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/tig-notaro-louis-ck-needs-to-handle-his-sexual-misconduct-rumors

post #1686 of 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacknifeJohnny View Post

 in the coming days, she might owe a few women who have nothing to do with this an apology.

 

Why would she apologize for something that is entirely Whedon's doing?  He brought this on himself and anyone else who is injured from collateral damage.  All she did was talk about what he did to her.

post #1687 of 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambler View Post
 

 

Why would she apologize for something that is entirely Whedon's doing?  He brought this on himself and anyone else who is injured from collateral damage.  All she did was talk about what he did to her.

She shouldn't be sorry when it comes to Whedon. However you know how people act. Right now every actress he worked with is being looked at as a potential mistress. It must feel kind of shitty to get accused of that and the internet mob is SO SURE. In her letter she could have just said he cheated on her and just said randoms girls or fans or whatever. Or named names. Because if one of the mistresses did get called out.....well that's on them too. But leaving it vague does put some of the women that worked with him in a tight spot.

post #1688 of 1839
post #1689 of 1839
I think he just meant that whether this is something Whedon did on the regular or not, there's definitely a lot of women that he worked with who didn't have anything to do with him in that way who aren't gonna appreciate that implication..
post #1690 of 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waaaaaaaalt View Post
 

She shouldn't be sorry when it comes to Whedon. 

 

Exactly my point.  It's his mess.  Let him deal with it.  

 

She shouldn't be apologizing for anything.  

post #1691 of 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fraid uh noman View Post

I think he just meant that whether this is something Whedon did on the regular or not, there's definitely a lot of women that he worked with who didn't have anything to do with him in that way who aren't gonna appreciate that implication..

 

Yes, and you know who's fault that is?

 

post #1692 of 1839
Did it seem like I was taking Whedon's side or something?
post #1693 of 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fraid uh noman View Post

Did it seem like I was taking Whedon's side or something?

 

No, but my point seems to be getting lost... unless I'm missing something?

post #1694 of 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambler View Post
 

 

Yes, and you know who's fault that is?

 

 

Isn't that the MRA Hat? What a dead givaway!

post #1695 of 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambler View Post

No, but my point seems to be getting lost... unless I'm missing something?
Your point isn't lost.

What you're missing is that after his wife says "he sleeps with women he works with" that any of the women he worked with who DIDN'T sleep with him could be like "whoa, wait a minute....I didn't." Whether she's right or not (I'm not saying she's not)....what she said could put a lot of the women who never slept with him in an uncomfortable position where people are looking at them like they might've or could've and I'm sure that's not something that they WANT to have to deal with or address or whatever. Certainly it's more on him. He's the perpetrator. But there's also some women out there who might be wishing right now that she'd worded things different. They probably don't hold any ill will toward her but that don't mean that they appreciate being lumped in as one of the women who MIGHT have slept with him..
post #1696 of 1839

She had two options: Name the women, or don't. Naming them would have removed their agency, as it's entirely up to them whether they want to disclose their relationship with Ja Wheed. What do you think she would have done?

 

Also, again, for the cheap seats, she was quoting him.

post #1697 of 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boone Daniels View Post
 

Also, again, for the cheap seats, she was quoting him.

 

Technically, she was claiming to quote him. I'm assuming the bulk/essence of what she's saying happened, to be clear. But to say she's quoting him as if we have some kind of objective reality to measure it against isn't accurate.

post #1698 of 1839

Yes, that's technically true - this isn't a Don Jr. thing where she's posting screencaps of the e-mails/letter. But it seems logical that she would be opening herself up to all kinds of libel suits if she did, in fact, make it up. 

post #1699 of 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fraid uh noman View Post


Your point isn't lost.

What you're missing is that after his wife says "he sleeps with women he works with" that any of the women he worked with who DIDN'T sleep with him could be like "whoa, wait a minute....I didn't." Whether she's right or not (I'm not saying she's not)....what she said could put a lot of the women who never slept with him in an uncomfortable position where people are looking at them like they might've or could've and I'm sure that's not something that they WANT to have to deal with or address or whatever. Certainly it's more on him. He's the perpetrator. But there's also some women out there who might be wishing right now that she'd worded things different. They probably don't hold any ill will toward her but that don't mean that they appreciate being lumped in as one of the women who MIGHT have slept with him..

 

All good, we're getting into semantics now.  We all get this.

 

I'm just trying to make it clear that Whedon's wife is accountable for nothing.  Literally, like zero.  Also, she may not even legally be able to name names for fear of libel suits, and she's already had enough to deal with.  She did what she could, and should've done... end of story.

post #1700 of 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boone Daniels View Post
 

She had two options: Name the women, or don't. Naming them would have removed their agency, as it's entirely up to them whether they want to disclose their relationship with Ja Wheed. What do you think she would have done?

 

Also, again, for the cheap seats, she was quoting him.

No, she could have just used the blanket "he had multiple affairs" and let that be that. Marti Noxon worked with Whedon and got a pretty good tv career out of it. Wouldn't it fucking suck if people are chalking that up to "well you know she only got there because she was fucking Joss Whedon". And yeah im well aware some people would say that anyway but this does add fuel to the fire.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Discourse
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › Misogyny and the discrimination and abuse of women in the US and around the world