Jump to content

Hollywood Sexual Harrasment/Assault Thread


cct

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

 

Believe it or not, this cover has generated some clapback.

 

The founder of the MeToo movement was not on the cover (she's on the inside) and there were people complaining that Kesha should've been on the cover, rather than Taylor Swift.


The Silence Breakers definitely deserved the POTY but the execution was not all it could've been.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

For all her faults, Taylor's trial this year was a BIG deal. I definitely have an issue with her bullying that blogger with a potential lawsuit for daring to talk about the alt-right following she has acquired but refuses to publicly denounce, but abuse is abuse no matter who the woman is (ditto Megyn Kelly, although Gretchen Carlson deserves equal if not more attention for her role in Roger Ailes' downfall). We can challenge them on their faults, but if we try to fight back with a "perfect victim" narrative every time  someone comes forward who we may either have issues with or outright don't like, we ALL lose. My feeling, as a woman, is that I may disagree on certain things certain women believe, but I will fight with everything I have to make sure those same women have the same rights I do. 

 

This is how I feel about Leeann Tweeden, too. Yes, she's a Trump supporter, but what Al Franken did to her was wrong, full stop. 

 

TIME made a statement that they wanted to focus their cover on women who impacted this movement this year in particular, hence (at least part of) the reason Kesha wasn't on the cover (although her album coming out this year might have been reason enough to include her, I don't know). 

 

 

 

No, I've seen it on Twitter all day. I don't agree with all the criticism, but as a white woman, I feel a responsibility to shut up and listen to black women/women of color and their criticism (the people who are just trolling/being angry for no reason? not so much). 

 

Oh no, I know about the arm on the cover, I meant the Tweet I linked of the cover in this thread. It shows up cut in half here, with the half of the cover with Taylor/the arm missing entirely. I guess the embedding was weird or something. 

Edited by MissLlanviewPA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Taylor's only there for the off chance she'd sell copies (even though she's barely recognizable), and she gave Time her only interview since she started promoting Reputation, which is a coup for them. But if anything Rose McGowan should be in her place.

Edited by Faulkner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Actually some of the harshest critiques on Swift came from other White women.

Awesomely Luvvie did write a blogpost claiming that she knew why Swift was on the cover while asking why she was really on the cover, but stated that she wasn't question the validity of Swift's presence in the issue but why on the cover.

I saw quite a few tweets like this today.

And that wasn't even the harshest one I saw. There was another one that came across my timeline (someone had retweeted it) that was very lengthy.

 

My issue with the cover was that Time choose to put Terana Burke on the inside and not on the cover.

She was the first person to say Me Too, almost two decades ago. 

I have to give props to Alyssa Milano because when the media wanted to brand her as the face of the MeToo movement, when she discovered that Burke had started this movement in the late 90s, Milano was very quick to try to educate people about Burke and has been doing so ever since.

 

In any case, I am glad to see this type of acknowledgement before Time gets taken over by Meredith Corporation, we may never see this type of acknowledgement of any type of progressive issues on their cover ever again.

 

Edited by DramatistDreamer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • John Black actually was the ultimate good guy soap hero. So I don’t mind the town gushing over him. It’s deserved.
    • Be glad it wasn't a Perry production. 

      Please register in order to view this content

    • I love my girl, but nope he's pathetic. 250K and now he's put her business at risk.   L O S E R    

      Please register in order to view this content

    • The whole town gushing over John Black as if he was a saint is eye rolling.  I guess death really colors people's memories over his many flaws, but I guess that is normal and human nature. I'm still confused as to why Leo hasn't been written out.  The actor stank up two soaps with his sub par acting, what does he have on TPTB's to remain on these soaps.   What's the point of Cat?  I hope the new head-writers figure out her purpose and develop her character. And I much prefer scenes not focusing on John's death because life does go on for the world when someone passes.  
    • Wasn't there a break in Zaslow's first run? I thought Roger was off-screen for a while, and when Zas came back, Roger was hiding at the boarding house and Nola figured out there was something hinkey about him. I'm pretty sure Simon chose to leave the first time and was replaced by RVV. I don't want to assume Jordan's issues played a role in his first departure, but Maeve said in an interview that at some point, it became very hard for her to work with him and she asked to work with him less. That seems to fit 1986, where suddenly Vanessa is essentially Ross' law clerk and not at every Lewis family moment.
    • He needs to divorce her arse with her constant cheating.   She's no better than Doug... she's F*cking pathetic.
    • I didn't know of any interruptions for Maeve Kinkead after her 1997 return. Her runs would then be 1981-1987, 1989-1996, 1997-2000, short arcs until the end. I knew Maureen Garrett second run was interrupted from a 2009 interview but I couldn't recall the exact year. Her runs would then be 1976-1980, 1988-2000, short arcs until the end.
    • As I said in May, I have no problem with Martin and Bradley being married. You can still do all the fun introloper storylines with them as you do everyone else. Both men of a certain age, and it is very believable for them to have either a first love or have been previously married. And, you can do it without either of them cheating!  

      Please register in order to view this content

       I said something similar during the premiere week. Bill was the perfect age to play Martin as Vernon and Anita's child. I would've much preferred this version, but oh well.
    • I don't know how you want to count Maeve. She "retired" in '00, but would come back for appearances. I don't know however if she made an appearance in '01 or '03. In '02 I believe she came back for Josh and Reva's wedding. I assume she came back when Gina Tognoni took over the role of Dinah. And I know she was back for Ross' memorial service. Maureen Garrett was around until at least '00. I don't think Holly was in town when Ben returned though. I just got pissed off about Jerry all over again.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy