Harvey Weinstein's Downfall Marks the Rise of Sexual Equality

The Harvey Weinstein story is not just about the end of a career. It's about the end of an era.

|

As disgraced movie mogul Harvey Weinstein half-asses his way through sex-addiction rehab, more and more women, ranging from Oscar winner Lupita Nyong'o to former teen star Molly Ringwald, keep coming forward with stories about his abusive and sometimes criminal behavior. Even his brother and longtime business partner Bob Weinstein has disowned him, calling him "indefensible," "crazy," and "remorseless."

But the Weinstein story is not just about the end of a career. It's about the end of an era.

The Miramax co-founder is only the latest in a long line of powerful older men whose professional lives ended with revelations of long-term harassment and worse. Fox News cashiered its founder Roger Ailes and star host Bill O'Reilly because of similar charges and Bill Cosby's 2014 comeback was destroyed after claims surfaced that he drugged and raped over a dozen women. The head of Amazon Studios was forced to resign last week after he was accused of "repeatedly and insistently" propositioning the producer of the streaming service's acclaimed series, The Man in the High Castle.

Weinstein was widely (and rightly) derided for blaming his decades-long behavior on having "come of age in the 60's and 70's, when all the rules about behavior and work places were different." Among other things, such a defense ignores the inconvenient fact that the Seventies ended nearly four decades ago.

But he is right that workplace expectations have changed–and that's largely because the workplace itself has changed. About 60 percent of women are in the workforce–compared to just 43 percent in 1970–and they are more likely to hold managerial or leadership roles than ever before. In fact, more than half of management, professional, and related positions are held by women. The pay gap has also essentially vanished. A study of 33 countries, including the United States, found that when comparing workers doing the same job, men made just 1.6 percent more than women.

With higher pay, positions, and status comes more workplace power–power that is amplified by social media and other technologies that empower dissent and make it harder and harder to maintain a sexist status quo.

There's a real issue that in the aftermath of the Harvey Weinstein revelations, behavior that is merely boorish or one-time-only will be conflated with systemic sexism and far-more-reprehensible crimes.

That's something we will sort through as a society. But surely it's more than coincidence that the Weinstein scandal broke just after Hugh Hefner, the absolute personification of old-school, pre-equality male sexual identity was being lowered into the ground.

The old days–and the old ways–are being laid to rest. And that's a very good thing, for all of us regardless of gender.

Produced and edited by Todd Krainin. Written and narrated by Nick Gillespie.

Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Like us on Facebook

Follow us on Twitter

Subscribe to our podcast at iTunes

NEXT: GOP Anti-Flake Anti-Trumpers Just Want Trumpism Without Trump

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. More the Rise of the New Puritanism.

    If you take at face value that women should be able to exploit their own talents for what ever benefits it might confer, how can you deny men the same?

    Not once in the whole Weinstein saga have I heard of an actress denied a role for refusing his advances. That is a different animal than promising whatever for acquiescing, or others who went to town of their own accord.

    Essentially you are saying women offering is okay, but men asking is an affront.

    Pretty far removed from equality.

    1. Man, that is a bizarre definition of “asking.”

      1. Hey CX, I have a question for you…::takes balls out::

        1. I’m not hearing a “No!”.

    2. Poor fat ugly Harvey Weinstein – Made to prostitute his talent for making money by women who should never have used the power of their attractiveness to force him to give them a job.

    3. Well, this is one take I guess.

    4. If you haven’t heard of an actress being retaliated against for refusing his advances you aren’t reading the accounts. It wasn’t that blatant. Actresses just never heard from his production companies again after their current role and they had fewer offers. Others were not offered jobs period. Perhaps he never said the words, but the action is acted on.

      https://tinyurl.com/ycumybkf

      1. I didn’t say retaliate, I said refused a role, which would make it actionable under sexual harassment laws or at least hostile work environment (which has the most lenient standards of evidence). Of course that would mean actually speaking up which appears to be a problem in Hollywood. I suppose you could have even more legal safeguards that people refuse to act upon. It’s a damn shame Weinstein was the only game in town, or that the actresses couldn’t bring up their concerns with the Screen Actors Guild. Apparently their own union also under Weinstein’s thumb.

        Even more damning is the silence over the outright accusations of rape while, if true, are certainly abhorrent, but then, per your article, you have a case like with Gutierrez, where the D.A. stated “a criminal charge is not supported”, and the payment for the non-disclosure agreement after the fact. What exactly am I to make of this?

        And of course Asia Argento continuing to date Weinstein even after he supposedly raped her, or feeling “obliged” after he offered to pay for her nanny. There are no perfect victims, but in my neck of the woods, this is called prostitution with extra steps.

        At least some people are upfront about it.

  2. But the Weinstein story is not just about the end of a career. It’s about the end of an era.

    The old days–and the old ways–are being laid to rest. And that’s a very good thing, for all of us regardless of gender.

    Weinstein is an asshole that apparently needs to be prosecuted. However, the idea that he is representative of an era of consistent behavior of men, and men only, is a mental fabrication that Nick, apparently, feels the need to rid himself of. The rest of us have been able to keep it in our pants and call scumbags as such to their faces.

    There’s plenty of evidence that women rape and assault men and women at rates not-so-phenomenally different than men. The idea that Weinstein somehow caps off an era or culture not only robs good men of any agency they may’ve had, it grants agency to women, unduly, in a fashion little different than Weinstein accumulated it in the first place. Fuck off Nick.

    1. There’s plenty of evidence that women rape and assault men and women at rates not-so-phenomenally different than men.

      Wut?

      1. There’s a lot of bullshit packed into Nick’s narrative so it’s highly likely I’ve overloaded my comment as well.

        Mainly I mean we don’t convict Weinstein and walk into a Post-Weinstein era of sexual assault free bliss. At best, we move from a “Harvey Weinstein – known scumbag.” era to an “Emma Sulkowicz – Assaulter or hero?” era.

        I certainly don’t mean to portray parity between males and females in terms of rape and/or assault, but if you look at the numbers they aren’t anything that would make you think women are immune to the same behavior in the same or similar roles. If you regard only the physical gender of the rapist/assaulter and tend to favor victims (as is the new norm in the Post-Weinstein era), the ratio is 2:1-1.5:1.

        I mean, if Bill Clinton was guilty of using the power of his office to coerce women to have sex with him and Hillary actually and actively attacked and defamed them publicly, has a sexual assault been committed and by whom? Is it somehow better than Weinstein asking women who wander into his bathroom to take their shirt off?

        1. “There’s a lot of bullshit packed into Nick’s narrative so it’s highly likely I’ve overloaded my comment as well.”

          Wow. So now at “Reason” the rule is “one steaming cow pie deserves another”? Put another way, this is the lamest excuse for poor reasoning (pun kindasorta intended) I could imagine anyone coming up with. We don’t get anywhere with shotgun statements backed up by shoddy analysis. To begin with, you have yet to produce any facts regarding women raping men. Did Hillary (does she still) enable her serial predator husband? Yes. Did she rape Monica Lewinsky or Paula Jones? No.

          1. We don’t get anywhere with shotgun statements backed up by shoddy analysis. To begin with, you have yet to produce any facts regarding women raping men.

            If your precepts are shoddy no amount of analysis can fix it. The idea that you require or suggest women raping men as parity is rather specifically my point. Getting rape-y unscrupulous men out of Hollywood and replacing them with rape-y unscrupulous women isn’t a win.

            Gillespie’s shunning a fiction he’s generated about an older era in favor of one that he doesn’t even espouse as being better, just different. No amount of fact can refute the fiction that exists in Nick’s head. Moreover, the progressive notions of sexual assault (as seen under Title IX and documented extensively here at Reason) don’t require explicit actions nor direct participation.

      2. Not sure about that claim, but if one assumes that men and women are more or less the same it would seem to be a natural conclusion unless one believes women are actually a little better than men.

        At least, that would be one way to look at it. As far as evidence goes for such a claim, I’m aware of none. In fact, most ‘evidence’ (and I wouldn’t trust it) is that men are impossible to rape. At least, this is what the law tries to tell us which is an odd claim to make.

        1. Not sure about that claim, but if one assumes that men and women are more or less the same it would seem to be a natural conclusion unless one believes women are actually a little better than men.

          From Wikipedia:

          In a 2010 study of heterosexual couples where sexual coercion existed, 45% reported female victimization, 30% reported male victimization and 20% reported reciprocal victimization.

          A telephone survey conducted in 2010 for the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that 43.8% of lesbians reported having been raped, physically abused or stalked at some point by an intimate partner; of these, 67.4% reported the perpetrator or perpetrators as being exclusively female.

          I’m not Joe Biden but my math seems to say that almost half of lesbians are likely to be raped (on or off campus) and that 2/3 of the time the perpetrators are women. I don’t claim these stats as unassailable fact, just as a strong indication that women sexually assault men people at a rate not exceedingly different than men. Moreover, if you look at relative incarceration rates, they’re arguably more likely to get away with it too.

          I don’t mean to portray men as victims by any means, just accurately convey that the notion we’re rapidly reaching gender parity, or that it’s even desirable, is bullshit.

          1. I…honestly don’t know what a study that talks about Lesbians has to do with man on woman or woman on man sexual assault rates. I would probably agree with you on the subject, but using lesbians as their group was a questionable choice right out of the gate.


            In a 2010 study of heterosexual couples where sexual coercion existed, 45% reported female victimization, 30% reported male victimization and 20% reported reciprocal victimization.

            That bit seems applicable, if questionable. Either way it’s some stats, which is probably more useful than making claims based on individual opinion I suppose.

            1. I…honestly don’t know what a study that talks about Lesbians has to do with man on woman or woman on man sexual assault rates.

              I’m a bit confused that you think all sexual assaults are exclusively hetero or that non-hetero assaults somehow don’t count. Harvey Weinstein’s arrest means we’re moving towards gender parity/equality? Does that mean no more Harvey Weinsteins of any gender or just that Rosie O’ Donnell takes his place?

              Again, I don’t mean to disparage lesbians specifically as much as point out that the disparity between genders and the flagrant overlooking of social/moral transgressions would likely not go away.

              1. Rape is a crime of the powerful over the powerless. Men are generally more powerful than women. Why is it such a mystery that men are more often the accused perpetrators? When women who would rape find prey, they also attack. Just because women have a smaller pool of potential victims does not mean that women are less prone than men to this despicable behavior; it might just mean that adult victims of rape who seek prosecution are women and that victims of rape by a woman are shamed twice, both by the rape and by the fact that the perpetrator is “weak”

              2. Rape is a crime of the powerful over the powerless. Men are generally more powerful than women. Why is it such a mystery that men are more often the accused perpetrators? When women who would rape find prey, they also attack. Just because women have a smaller pool of potential victims does not mean that women are less prone than men to this despicable behavior; it might just mean that adult victims of rape who seek prosecution are women and that victims of rape by a woman are shamed twice, both by the rape and by the fact that the perpetrator is “weak”

                1. Men are generally more powerful than women. Why is it such a mystery that men are more often the accused perpetrators?

                  At least a good part of the Harvey Weinstein case doesn’t involve physical dominance.

                  A woman forcibly raped can go to the police, neighbors, etc. A man blackmailed has much fewer options especially if children or other family members whom he cares about are involved. Again, not to portray men as across-the-board victims, just that this is hardly the end of an era and, if it is, the incoming era is only less rape-y and/or more equal if you buy into some false history or welcome the new era in a manner that enables women to do amoral things by libertarian standards.

                  This is my point about Emma Sulkowicz and ‘the rise of gender “equality”‘. If Nungesser wasn’t physically, socially, legally, or psychologically capable of extricating himself from her reach, she would be effectively raping (or just blackmailing for sex, w/e) him in a manner little different from Weinstein. And there are *tons* of women who support *her*. I’d love to say that men warn their sons about women like this (or worse) and that it was effective. However, along the same lines, I’d assume every woman in the world has been warned about a scumbag like Harvey Weinstein.

          2. I may us different words but there is plenty evidence that men are abused in shocking numbers. Sexually as children (1/6 according to Psychology Today, CDC claims 1/20), or as adults, men are victims of abusive relationships (1/9 vs 1/4 women according to CDC).

            Women have used sexual favors as a way to get ahead in life since humanity’s first origins. The Sugar Daddy/Gold Digger cliches are exactly that because ambitious women like to get ahead and some don’t want to study a decade and get advanced degrees.

            Naturally, I ended up living in a mobile home, later a downtown studio, with two Bachelor’s and a Master’s. Yeah Weinstein is a douchebag, but one who ensured Gwyneth Paltrow an Oscar, over Cate Blanchett’s portrayal as Queen Elizabeth.

          3. Hey there, meant to reply to mad.casual OP: I may us different words but there is plenty evidence that men are abused in shocking numbers. Sexually as children (1/6 according to Psychology Today, CDC claims 1/20), or as adults, men are victims of abusive relationships (1/9 vs 1/4 women according to CDC).

            Women have used sexual favors as a way to get ahead in life since humanity’s first origins. The Sugar Daddy/Gold Digger cliches are exactly that because ambitious women like to get ahead and some don’t want to study a decade and get advanced degrees.

            I ended up living in a mobile home, later a downtown studio, with two Bachelor’s and a Master’s. Yeah Weinstein is a douchebag, but one who ensured Gwyneth Paltrow an Oscar, over Cate Blanchett’s portrayal as Queen Elizabeth.

        2. 1) The average college age man today has the grip strength of the average 30 year old woman. (Male Physical Decline) When you consider the possibility of drugs slipped into a drink or rope tied during a nap, the idea of a woman physically overpowering a man becomes even more plausible.

          2) The presence of an erect penis is not an affirmative defense when a woman rapes a man any more than the presence of an erect clitoris lets a male rapist off the hook. Haven’t you ever gotten a lap dance from a female stripper that got you hard without making you want to risk disease, the anger of her boyfriend or your girlfriend, or pregnancy by having sex with her?

          1. Is… is that first point a joke? Not every man going to college is what the kids call a “nu-male”. Men have always been on average more physically powerful than women. Anecdotal evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.

        3. “In fact, most ‘evidence’ (and I wouldn’t trust it) is that men are impossible to rape”

          Not true. Men can be rape, Normally by other men. However when a woman rapes a man they will use torture or other forms of coercion ( like a gun or blackmail ) to force a man to have sex. A long time ago I read about a case in the 1950’s where two very fat women over powered a small man and stab him with needles (even threating to stab him in the testacies) in till he preformed. when he went to the police about they at first laughed at him. It’s been some time, but the last time I look at the F.B.I stats on rape. I think men victims of rape came to 11% of all rape victims and only less than 1% of these, was a women raping a man.

      3. In 2010 the CDC added a category of sexual violence they called “being made to penetrate”. This means victims were forced to penetrate someone else with their own body parts, either by force or coercion, or when otherwise unable to consent (drunk, high, etc). When that was taken into account they found the rates of non-consensual sexual contact equalized. 1.270 million women and 1.267 million men. 46% of the males reported a female rapist. This is NOT including inmates at all.

        Because of that further work had to be done and found some surprising results. Women are more likely to be abused by fellow female inmates, while men by guards…many female.

        In the juvenile cases, boys actually reported 90% of their sexual abuse was at the hands of female staff members. Including child inmates, 900,000 incidents of sexual abuse was uncovered. But then again, I’m sure it’s easier to rape children or trade it for drugs for them than it is grown men (who might be stronger than you), so I’m actually not all that surprised that women, being human, have their fair share of guilt in sexual abuse.

    2. There’s plenty of evidence that women rape and assault men and women at rates not-so-phenomenally different than men…

      You lost me here.

      1. It’s the weirdest deflection I ever see from these types.

    3. Mad: I agree that indictement of our entire sex is outrageously overblown.

      But what evidence that women rape and assault? I’m almost 80 and not once did I get raped or sexually assaulted.

      1. But what evidence that women rape and assault? I’m almost 80 and not once did I get raped or sexually assaulted.

        First, assaulted or sexually assaulted? I’ve been assaulted by way more women than men. Pretty specifically because of the disparities both physically and under the law.

        Being clearer, not (necessarily) the conventional definitions of rape and sexual assault, that era is leaving. Nick is bidding it farewell. The modern definitions where rape is any unwanted sexual relationship and sexual assault is any unwanted sexual advances (both times conflating the civil with the criminal). I’ve said it before; much of what’s been labeled as rape and assault by progressive equality laws makes both my wife and I rapists on a regular basis.

        No women ever grabbed your ass? No woman you worked for or with expressed a romantic interest in you? Never had pity sex or buyer’s remorse? I’ve had women put me in situations both in work and out that, had gender roles been reversed, it would’ve been blatant sexual harassment and/or had a man done it to me, fist fights would’ve ensued. I’m not exceptionally attractive and it seems to be as much an opportunistic lording of power as it does anything sexual. I know I’m far from the only one. I’m not exactly saying I want to see each and every one of these women lose their jobs or go to jail, just that the era where that decision was in any way up to me or between me and them is the one Nick is eschewing with enthusiasm.

  3. Weinstein happened because he operates out of the Hollywood bubble. They makes tons of money on a business model not bound by any real market rules, and his private behavior is symptomatic of that.

    Hollywood practically controls the movie distribution and delivery method for all the viable movies. All the ticket prices are virtually the same – a crap romantic comedy cost the consumer the same as the next Avengers film. And ticket prices can remain artificially high because the theater chains agree to run their business like an amusement park. Everyone HAS to watch new movies in theaters. There are no streaming or DVD options.

    Couple that with the facts that Americans avoid foreign language films and no foreign movie studios can challenge Hollywood, and Tinseltown is guaranteed boatloads of money. That made them feel untouchable. They can act like bullies and pick fights with half the country that doesn’t agree with their political views, whereas companies that make cookies, toothpastes, detergents and razors mostly stay out of politics – because they depend on volume sales in a competitive market and can’t afford to alienate customers.

    1. I’m surprised no one has made an issue of all those ‘whitening’ strips and tooth pastes. I mean come one. Whitening? You can’t get more honky racist than that!

      1. White teeth are essential for maximum contrast with your blackface.

    2. Good point. I don’t think sexual harassment was as common in the baking business.

    3. “Everyone HAS to watch new movies in theaters”
      So you are suggesting that by downloading the latest movies from questionable sites and not going to theaters, I am contributing to a less rapey culture.


  4. Even his brother and longtime business partner Bob Weinstein has disowned him, calling him “indefensible,” “crazy,” and “remorseless.”

    Yeah, right, sure, ok. I’m sure you just found out about all this a few weeks ago. Yep. I betcha. After knowing him for the entirely of your life.

    Sorry, but this thing isn’t going anywhere in Hollywood. It just isn’t. You happened to find and crush a roach and underneath the floorboards there are a thousand more. Think about the basis of Hollywood, and how every look, move, sound, and picture is coordinated six ways from Sunday and tell me there aren’t going to be casting agents that are looking at an actresses tits thinking ‘would I get off to these?’ and if the answer is no they don’t get the job.

    That doesn’t need to translate into sexism necessarily, but it’s hard enough to tell the difference that I doubt you could hire someone to do that job. Hollywood itself is inherently sexist, racist, etc. because that is Hollywood’s job that we hire them to do every time we go to the movies. It is the comfortable lie. The edgy opinion. The propaganda to the masses.

    There is no room for Truth in Hollywood. I doubt there’s even room for Truth at Sundance, but at least the production quality is lower.

    1. Yeh. Matt Damon claiming he didn’t know the depths of Harvey’s depravity – while not really believable – is more digestible than the brother claiming he didn’t know.

      But let’s face it. They both knew and claiming otherwise is pipi caca.

      1. “In Hollywood your job is to show up on set looking as fuckable as possible.”
        -Bill Burr

        1. But not too f—able, am I right, my n—-?

    2. Well, Hillary was as shocked to learn about Weinstein from the media as she was when she learned about Bill!

  5. People act like it’s only Weinstein. Sorry, but this is pretty much all of Hollywood culture. Making Harvey your scopegoat does not make your sin go away. He may be the most egregious and shameless of the creepy old liberals running the show, but he’s not the only one.

    1. It goes back decades.

      And usually points to people of low character and confidence engaging in it.

      What a surprise.

  6. I remember years ago Michael Crichton getting a lot of flak for his novel Disclosure in which a female executive was sexually harassing a male underling. Crichton does (did, since he died a few years back and he’s still dead as far as I know) a shitload of research for his novels and had the stats to show that while sexual harassment by female bosses was fairly uncommon, so was having a female boss and the two things were exactly proportional. The feminists of course weren’t having it even though he had the stats to show that sexual harassment is like rape – it’s not about sex, it’s about power and it doesn’t matter whether it’s a male or a female with the power. I strongly suspect that for every Weinstein you see there’s a dozen you don’t see and they’re not all guys.

    1. And since as you correctly point out harassment and rape are not about sex but about power, a lot of the harassment and abuse that goes on in Hollywood is women victimizing other women. If you ever see a documentary on the fashion or modeling industries, it is amazing how homely the women who work behind the camera in those industries are. You can imagine few better revenge fantasies for homely girls than growing up to spend your life controlling the careers of beautiful women and having the power to tell them how fat they are and degrade them however you choose. Some of the harassment stories that have come out post-Weinstein have involved women degrading and humiliating actresses.

      1. As a comedian I joke about the War on Women. “It’s real, and the worst is, those byatches don’t even roofie me!”. Holy crap, have I been bullied and mistreated by female managers! There’s little more vicious animals than female cliques, getting off on ostracizing a well liked, nice looking, smart female.

  7. I am going to go out on a limb here and say that there will continue to be an endless stream of beautiful women willing to sleep with even the ugliest troll like Weinstein to get into movies. And as that great economist, Seay taught us, “supply creates demand”.

    Weinstein only got outed because his movies stopped making money. There will always be women willing to fuck to get in the movies and people will always be willing to allow men to take advantage of that provided the man makes everyone rich.

    For all of Nick’s many faults, he is really at his worst when he tries to draw big conclusions from everyday banalities like he is doing here.

    1. Sugar Daddy/gold diggers are here to stay, despite the fact that Weinstein sounds like a exhibitionist douchebag. As someone else already pointed out the hypocrisy; why aren’t we calling Bill Clinton a douche bag?

      1. “We” are calling him just that. It’s Hillary and her myrmidons who refuse to do so

    2. Like porn stars. I mean how drunk, drugged or lost do you have to be to insert Ron Jeremy’s dick in you?

      1. Unlike Weinstein, at least RJ is a nice guy. And packing a prodigious pecker.

    3. The internet allows us to cut out the middle man. An attractive woman inclined to make money off her vulva can film herself masturbating and upload the video to a porn website that gives artists a cut of the revenue. That route is more respectable than sleeping with the boss, in my opinion.

      1. You could make that argument, but that little porno won’t get her an Oscar

  8. It’s strange to me that, while all this Junior Anti-Sex League stuff is going on, people aren’t apoplectic about all the abuse and harassment at schools. The same with LEO sex abuse. If abuse stories involving a Catholic priest were dropping as fast as they are in the public sector we’d be bombing the Vatican. A curious dichotomy.

    1. Because Teachers’ Unions have even more juice than Hollywood. The amount of actual sexual abuse that happens in public schools dwarfs anything the perverts and Hollywood or the closet case queers in the priesthood could even dream of. But, no one says a word because public schools are wonderful!!.

      1. The current thrust is totally powerful male v. weaker targets of both sexes. Maybe the reverse sexual power structure is too counter-revolutionary to be faced, but it’s there and it is abused. They’re either woke or they ain’t.

        1. And some of the power is women on women. So you have the Prog sacred cow triple play of public schools, women, and gays. No way in hell are they touching that.

      2. Add to that the belief that home values depend on the school district. The local government run school is the most respected institution in the average American town.

  9. There’s a real opportunity here to follow these threads wherever they go and root out these predators. More likely, we get a lot of smoke and noise, some number of heads on pikes, and then back to business.

    1. I would love to see the people who rape children go down over this, but I seriously doubt that will happen.

      1. There is a sure-fire way to gauge the sincerity of the Feminist/Media/Liberal axis when it comes to seeking justice for all who have been sexually abused: Keep a close eye on the public status of William Jefferson Clinton.

        Once Bill is finally called to account for his treatment of Juanita Broaddrick and Kathleen Willey and ostracized a la Weinstein, or once Hillary finally files the divorce papers and spills the beans on Bill’s excesses, then you will know that the dam has truly burst and a real change — and not some Potemkin orgy of virtue-signaling — is upon us.

        Given how Bill is still being treated as respectable by the Media and the political Establishment you can get an idea of how eager people are to really, truly “root out these predators”.

  10. RE: Harvey Weinstein’s Downfall Marks the Rise of Sexual Equality
    The Harvey Weinstein story is not just about the end of a career. It’s about the end of an era.

    Doubtful.
    History and human nature tells us there will always be sexual predators in every aspect of our society, especially in the most powerful positions.

  11. “The old days–and the old ways–are being laid to rest.”

    When has such behavior been publicly approved? When was it considered acceptable to mistreat vulnerable women?

    Evil men exploit vulnerable women because they can, and because they’re evil, not because they didn’t know it was wrong or because some vague “society” told them to do it.

    Thus, I speculate that evil men will still try and get away with such things if they think they can, and sometimes they’ll get caught at it.

    1. And when said evil men are really good at something such that their efforts make themselves and others millions of dollars, there will be a line of people ready to cover up for them in exchange for getting in on the action. I honestly wonder what the hell goes through Gillespie’s head sometimes. Does he really believe some of the crap he says?

      1. It’s the swipe at “the old days” which gets me – there has been evildoing since the Garden. Generally, people aren’t necessarily doing bad things because they’re ignorant and simply need some modern moralist to explain great new moral insights to them.

        Sure, sometimes there are society-wide evils which give people cover to do bad things – the days of legalized slavery, a vicious war, other examples could be cited. In those situations evils like sexual abuse and worse were winked at or approved.

        But I don’t think the author was talking about these circumstances, but is acting as if there was, once upon a time, *approval* of powerful guys exploiting women.

      2. Gillespie is fond of using the latest social upheaval as prima facie evidence that the long-awaited Libertarian Moment is finally upon us, even if the natural result of the upheaval will be most un-Libertarian in nature.

        While I shed no tears over a slob like Weinstein, this is hardly a sign that Hollywood and the Democrat Party are finally willing to end their love affairs with wealthy but abusive men who push liberal causes. Weinstein is being jettisoned because he is no longer a reliable source of income to the Left, not because they have suddenly Got Religion over sexual harassment. If President Rodham were in the White House right now it’s likely you never would have heard a peep about this.

        What is likely to come of the Weinstein Saga is not some new era of Egalitarian Sexual Enlightenment, but a corporate version of the current college rape panic where men will have their careers ruined over the most trivial incidents and women will be encouraged to treat a clumsy date proposal as the moral equivalent of violent rape.

    2. Evil men exploit vulnerable women because they can, and because they’re evil, not because they didn’t know it was wrong or because some vague “society” told them to do it.

      Moreover, while it’s not an explicit argument against equality itself, an equality that simply diversifies and/or expands the victim pool is not one to be lauded.

      Catching/outing a Harvey Weinstein is a win. Trading a Harvey Weinstein for an Emma Sulkowicz or a Lena Dunham or a Jackie Coakley *and* a Sabrian Erdely is quid pro quo with people who don’t give two shits about morality, yours or otherwise, and just want to debase the existing system as much as possible.

    3. “Thus, I speculate that evil men will still try and get away with such things if they think they can, and sometimes they’ll get caught at it.”

      And so will evil women.

      1. I dunno, if there these evil women lurking about, how come they never try to molest *me*?

        1. Right on. Fair is fair, right?

    4. “Evil men exploit vulnerable women”

      How is “I’ll make you a millionaire if your sleep with me” exploitation? Seems more like prostitution to me.

  12. Truly entering a new era will require those who have been victims to have the courage to step up and speak out. How many Weinstein victims are also victims – at least in part – of the victims who preceded them and failed to speak out and protect the “next person”?

    1. We’re forgetting another vulnerable group that are abused by the Hollywood or any entertainment system: young, beautiful males servicing gay Hollywood.

      1. Being males, they’re not victims, because males are strong and capable of agency.

      2. We’re forgetting another vulnerable group that are abused by the Hollywood or any entertainment system: young, beautiful males servicing gay Hollywood.

        Well, see, there is the problem: you think that “young beautiful individuals” are “vulnerable” and are being “abused” when they agree to sex for money or career advancement? Are these people incapable of saying “sex only after marriage”?

        How about we call these people for what they are: prostitutes or sluts?

    2. Instead you have shameless lying idiots like Elizabeth Warren now trying to capitalize on it. Even loose women who loved being a fuck friend are gonna turn around and claim they were harassed or assaulter.

      I don’t know who to believe!

      /SHAKES PUNCTURED BAG OF APPLES.

  13. Hollywood has always been like this. The only difference from one era to another has been the degree of PRETENSE.

    1. Not even that. It is not just Hollywood, many corporate cultures house their very own.

      Hollywood is particularly insidious because in addition to being nasty to women, it is also just an unprofessional cesspool all around

      1. Paint Thinner|10.25.17 @ 8:58PM|#
        “Not even that. It is not just Hollywood, many corporate cultures house their very own.”

        “Many”? I’m sure our new lefty twit has cites for that, right, lefty twit?
        Remember, your claim is “many”.

  14. Am I the only one who objects to pillorying people for sex crimes without proof? If Wienstein broke a law, go to the cops and then once the courts hash out the truth maybe we can judge the convicted fairly.

      1. Oh, I would fully expect their to be. I, personally though, think people should let that run its course before rushing to condemn someone. I’m not a particular fan of Mr Weinstein but everyone deserves their day in court and an honest chance to defend themselves.

        This is Reason.com, right? After years of covering the supposed campus rape epidemic and its fallout it’s a little odd to see an article like this here from Mr Gillespie, but maybe he believes rights of the accused are only for poor non-famous men.

        1. He and his company have paid out millions of dollars in settlements. It’s on record. Those settlements showing a pattern of needing to pay people off would be in front of judge and jury. There are many witnesses now willing to speak out. I wouldn’t want to be his lawyer.

          1. Actually they wouldn’t. The entire point of a settlement is that you are paying someone to not make claims against you. That means legally the claims go away. Settlements are not an admission of guilt and there are many reasons to settle a claim besides being in the wrong. The defendant often does not want to spend time and money defending themselves in court and the plaintiff may worry that their case is not solid enough for a conviction.

      2. I don’t see how you can prove rape 13 years after the fact, with no physical evidence. In fact, in California, the statute of limitations is 10 years for rape.

    1. No, you have the company of millions of your fellow morons.

      Pay attention to what the issue is: several women over the years have been sexually harassed and even assaulted by this asshole. And some of them reported the incident, and the cops did nothing. It did not even make it to a court.

      THAT is the problem,

      That the culture is so corrupted that men like him, Ailes, Billdo etc. get away with it, and morons like you are clamoring for Judge Judy to render a verdict before you can even pretend to be decent humans,

      Go fuck yourself!

      1. Innocent until PROVEN guilty is such bullshit, isn’t it? We should hang everyone the very second they are accused of a crime!

      2. Ooo. “Go fuck yourself”. Now I’m convinced.

        Assume everything said about Weinstein is true, most of the events do not rise (sorry) to the level of anything a DA is going to prosecute regardless of who the offender is. No physical evidence, “he said/she said”, and in the pile of felony jackets on the DA’s desk this would be way at the bottom.

        And by the way, nobody is defending Weinstein’s conduct. Was it abusive, gross, ignoble, degrading of the women? Certainly. Was it criminal? Not necessarily. There is a difference that even you should be able to discern.

  15. Let me know when these people come out denouncing Roman Polanski. Last I recall these same people were all fine with drugging and anally raping an underage kid declaring such not “rape-rape”.

    But hey, a new age is upon us apparently.

    1. Social justice neither: I lived in Paris for a few years, and saw the most famous director after say, Ridley Scott, sit in Les Bains Douches with a child/woman on his lap.

      While Roman Polanski was sitting there too, with Emmanuel Seigner on his lap! Who looked much younger for her age (then, not now), she was around 18 at the time. They ended up married.

    2. Who exactly is “these people”?

      1. Norwegians.

        /narrows eyes.

      2. The “not rape-rape” comment came from Whoopi Goldberg her very own self in a segment of The View

    3. “Let me know when these people come out denouncing Roman Polanski. Last I recall these same people were all fine with drugging and anally raping an underage kid declaring such not “rape-rape”.”

      Yeah, I was wondering the same thing. H’wood seems to be quite selective (not to say “fashionable”) regarding outrage.
      Weinstein certainly seems to deserve it, but (Polanski) he’s not alone.

      1. They had no choice with Weinstein. If he had been a less powerful person who didn’t (allegedly) assault/harrass as many women, they probably would have waved it off. Shit, they likely would have given him a SO like they did Polanski!

        1. If it had been a less powerful person than Weinstein he probably wouldn’t have had anywhere near as many opportunities either

  16. In the end, all Weinstein’s downfall signals is the revolution eating one of its own. As they always do. He’s not even signalling a big purge is in the works. He’s just one more Progressive that got caught in his own hypocrisy – just like any number of homosexual conservative politicians and prostitute favoring televangelists.

    Unfortunately for him, the conservatives have this thing called ‘forgiveness’ built into their ideology – Progressivism does not feel pity or remorse, or fear.

  17. One problem, aside from Harvey being a galactic douche, is that rehab or re-education, was designed by the cultural elites for little people and “goys” who don’t march lock-step. It’s not for its creators. See; Do as I say not as I do.

  18. The solution – gender fems – fire all XYs. Mike Pence – never be alone with a XX other then wifey, ever. Sounds like Catholic grammer and HS I went to. Boy have we come a distance as a culture.

    1. The solution – gender fems – fire all XYs.

      We keep trying that. The problem is that the XYs then go on to found businesses, and those businesses do much better than the XX businesses, and then all the XXs want to work for the XYs again.

  19. “Harvey Weinstein’s Downfall Marks the Rise of Sexual Equality”

    That’s a joke, right? Because Harvey’s downfall only highlights the shockingly self-serving behavior of women out there when it comes to the issues of equality and harassment. How many career women in film knew about this and did nothing….for years….even after their career peaks? Ashley Judd had the gall to lecture the country on harassment just last year, all the while keeping mum as young women in Hollywood dealt with blatant predation. It’s appalling and pathetic that our presumed “moral leaders”, as they see themselves, turned a blind eye to this farce. How many victims? How many young lives scarred because of self-serving women more worried about their own careers?

    To hell with them all.

  20. Two summers ago I was walking alone along a Delaware beach at around 8 a.m. when a group of about 10 middle-aged women began hooting and hollering and shouting obscenities at me from the deck of a beach house. They had been loud and relentless and disgusting and lewd. They were far enough away I could not really respond. Although embarrassed, I didn’t think anything of it until a few hours later when I actually felt a little shaken up. I was more upset with myself for allowing these over-the-hill whores to make me feel so creepy. If I had felt that way the exact moment it had happened I might have phone 911 just to teach the “girl party” a lesson. Would I have received sympathy from the local police, the courts, the press, even my friends and family? Would there have been justice for me? Hell no! Not a bit. That’s why I’m a true egalitarian. I say let women experience life the way men really do–that means taking the punches without a single fucking ass kiss from society. Women want equality then they had better take it for all it’s worth. If you don’t want it, then go back into the kitchen and bedroom and spread it and smile.

  21. But the Weinstein story is not just about the end of a career. It’s about the end of an era.

    There has never been an era where treating women like Weinstein did was acceptable. There certainly have been social niches where it has been acceptable, mostly in the arts and among leftists. It would be foolish to think that a scandal like this will end it.

    In any case, while Weinstein is an evil, dirty, fat old man, he is hardly much of a menace: any woman always had the option of slapping him in the face and walking out on him. Of course, most of the #MeToo crowd were gold diggers that kept silent for decades to help their careers and are piling on now for other selfish motives. Guys and gals in Hollywood: you deserve each other.

    1. I have a lot of sympathy for the young women (some teenagers) who were too intimidated to slap him in the face. Read some of the accounts. A 200 or more pound guy towering over you is scary.

      1. I have a lot of sympathy for the young women (some teenagers) who were too intimidated to slap him in the face. Read some of the accounts.

        Not a problem when you meet in the usual settings for transacting business or business-related socializing.

        A 200 or more pound guy towering over you is scary.

        That entirely depends on the guy and the circumstances.

  22. How could you leave out the largest group of serial abusers of power?

    politicians are rapists and gropers and murderers.

    Clinton the rapist, probably trump the groper, that republican that was raping little boys, I think there was a rapist politician from Alaska?, the NY governor who was biting prostitutes, Clinton went to that island with Epstein to screw and probably rape little girls, etc…

    I know I’m missing a bunch but the only thing that needs to be more exposed in america is the conversation about how evil 99% of politicians are.

  23. Yes, female bosses are now just as likely as male ones to engage in sexually harassing behavior at work. Truly, a level of equality to be proud of.

    I’ve seen at least one female executive exchange promotions for sexual favors where I currently work, so there’s that. Also, I was only 17 when a female manager (married) at work asked to see my dick one afternoon when I came in after school to work the dinner shift at KFC. She wasn’t the last one to do so either, as over the next decade I was propositioned by an additional manager (also married) who actually said “it’s not cheating if I just suck it”, and groped an assistant manager and a shift lead.

    You seem to think that skeevy behavior is something that only straight men engage in, when it most assuredly isn’t even slightly confined to gender or sexual preference. A quick look at the headlines for teachers banging their students should put that issue to rest.

    1. Thank you! Equality my ass. It’s about white male bashing. Notice how this narrative never came to national attention while the Muslims were gang raping women.

  24. Equality…HA! First let me say Harvey is getting what he deserves…no support for him at all. Now on the bigger talk of equality…well that’s great to a point. I grew up being taught to open doors for females ( guys are usually stronger) and other such quaint and dated notions. I still do it after some 50 yrs…equality? I worked for the Federal Govt in a pay system built to counter favoriteism, male or female doesn’t matter much as long as you do the job. So the often quoted 70% vs the 1.6% quoted is a new stat I can agree with…comparing a more difficult specialist pay to a more female filled general function is not equal pay. But all this omits basic sexuality…big time. So unless women want to undo centuries of sexual manipulation in the name of equality they should be careful of what they ask for. Do the Free-The-Nipple crowd not want men valuing seeing and feeling women’s breasts? Goodbye to most of the enhancemen surgery business. How much of the whole institution of marriage would be derailed when real equality is achieved? The world is evolving but is it it really for the better?

Please to post comments