| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Weinstein - Justice?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


Weinstein - Justice?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Weinstein - Justice?
    Posted: 15 Oct 2017 at 08:36
Harvey Weinstein has accomplished what most would have considered impossible-he's knocked Donald Trump off the headlines.

If the allegations being made against Weinstein are found to be true, he will deserve all of the anger and acrimony at present being aimed at him.

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has expelled Weinstein and he will no longer enjoy the benefits of being a member of the academy.

BUT, none of the allegations made to date have been proven. He hasn't been charged, and obviously not convicted.

A sleaze bag he may well be, but isn't he entitled to a trial before being found guilty and punished?


Once you eliminate the impossible,
whatever remains,
no matter how improbable, must be the truth.
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 1223
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Oct 2017 at 19:41
He paid off complainants and insulated himself from losing his job, so he thought.

I don't think he'll go to court maybe just pay off more claims at this point it's overkill. Especially the Hollywood people, all this feigned shock is hard to keep up! lol
The root of all desires is the one desire: to come home, to be at peace. -Jean Klein
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 2495
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Oct 2017 at 22:44
First the sentence! Then the trial!  The Red Queen said.
We're going to have a proper trial, and a first class hanging.

I don't think there is much real surprise or sympathy for him.

I am shocked! shocked! that there is gambling going on in this establishment!
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Oct 2017 at 00:40
A sleaze bag he may well be, but isn't he entitled to a trial before being found guilty and punished?


Once you eliminate the impossible,
whatever remains,
no matter how improbable, must be the truth.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 2495
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Oct 2017 at 01:05
Your talking about two different realms,
!) the court of public opinion.
2) the court of law.

If it is proven that he is lily-white innocent, then he can try to sue the media outlets for slander.  But considering that he has already made settlements with some accusers, I doubt he would get far with such claims.  Of course, settlements don't necessarily mean an admission of guilt.

I wonder, but don't know, if things were passed over because he was a degenerate, but a democratic degenerate, who gave to all the left causes and was a mover and shaker in the hollywood community.  Some people claim they didn't know, and perhaps they didn't, but maybe it was a matter of not looking or asking too closely.  Hollywood has a reputation for loose morals anyways, so maybe some where aware of shenanigans, but not non-consensual shenanigans.

Hollywood has a reputation for getting on its moral high horse, when it is something external, something they feel strongly about, over there, in your backyard.  It is not so good at the introspective, self-examination.  He definitely was "one of us" in the Hollywood scene, and now he is "one of them."  He is out of favor, but I am not sure Hollywood has really changed that much.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 1223
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Oct 2017 at 12:34
Hollywood hasn't changed and if Weinstein hadn't been outed in such a public way he would have carried on, undoubtedly.

toyomotor, he only needs a fair trial if he is charged and so far he has not been charged with anything.
The root of all desires is the one desire: to come home, to be at peace. -Jean Klein
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Oct 2017 at 19:02
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

Hollywood hasn't changed and if Weinstein hadn't been outed in such a public way he would have carried on, undoubtedly.

toyomotor, he only needs a fair trial if he is charged and so far he has not been charged with anything.

Except in the court of public opinion, where he's already being punished.

Kicked out of the Academy and had his Legion d'Honeur withdrawn.

OK, he deserves it, but the allegation are still only that, allegations.
Once you eliminate the impossible,
whatever remains,
no matter how improbable, must be the truth.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 2495
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Oct 2017 at 00:27
No, I think i understand what you are saying, toyomotor.  Hollywood is not particularly interested in due process, convict him first, _then_ kick him out.  I always thought that the Academy had something to do with promoting the arts, and whereas Weinstein has sinned, I am not sure he has sinned against the arts.  
But, hey, it is their club, they can do whatever they want to do.  I suppose you could argue that he is toxic, and they don't want someone toxic around.  It is not like he is Roman Polanski who drugged and raped a 14 year old, and fled to France.  I wonder if Polanski is in the Academy, I know big name actors have made films with him directing.  Polanski is excused by many, because of his "art."  Woody Allen is a little nervous these days and worried about a witch hunt, of course he is in a semi-incestuous relationship that needless to say, looks bad.  Southern California is known for its brush fires, and who knows how many acres will burn, before it burns itself out.
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Oct 2017 at 08:49
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

.......convict him first, then kick him out. 

It has always been thus.
Once you eliminate the impossible,
whatever remains,
no matter how improbable, must be the truth.
Back to Top
Dark Warrior View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar
Dark Warrior

Joined: 07 Oct 2017
Location: Colorado
Status: Offline
Points: 93
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dark Warrior Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Oct 2017 at 03:49
This isn't new for Bollywood or politics or life at large. Can us spell MONEY.

Those that have it have been known to use it to not only make more, gain influence and buy what they cant get otherwise. More often over the eons than those who didn't.

So what's new.

Harvey aint much different then Caligula.

Or Bill Clinton.
Back to Top
Dark Warrior View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar
Dark Warrior

Joined: 07 Oct 2017
Location: Colorado
Status: Offline
Points: 93
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Dark Warrior Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Oct 2017 at 17:45
Roger Aisles and Bill O Reilly most recently...former President JF Kennedy. Former Attorney General Robert Kennedy. Former President Grover Cleveland. Former Senator Edward 'Ted' Kennedy. Hell the entire male Kennedy family in many cases.

All these men exercised power money and influence.

Over 5000 years of recorded history seek the stories of ancient Emperors Vizers..Shah's, Grand Dukes. Dukes, Princes, Kings etc etc.

As sad as it is, it is not...let me state that again..IT IS NOT (caps for emphasis) new.

And for that matter, from a historical perspective, this behavior, violent or other, has only become or identified as a personal social anathema towards women..quite recently.


And that of course does not condone behavior such as this on my part. As I have personally had members of my female family who were subjected to abuse and physical assault.

Ntl, there are many who will deny that. Ie. the recently developed umbrage of such behavior.

And my response then is they neither know history nor are they viewing it properly. Assuming they did know what they were talking about in a contextual or objective fashion. Given the cultural traditions and mores of the contextual time in question.

(see the link: https://www.thedailybeast.com/grover-clevelands-sex-scandal-the-most-despicable-in-american-political-history)

(https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/addiction-in-society/200805/the-top-seven-kennedy-sex-scandal)
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Oct 2017 at 01:29
You've gone way off topic here. We weren't discussing the Kennedy family or anyone else, simply the fact that Weinstein has been punished without ever being charged and convicted.

OK, he's been damned in the court of public opinion, and maybe he deserves it, but some of the commentators so far have him hung drawn and quarterd. Maybe he deserves that too.
Once you eliminate the impossible,
whatever remains,
no matter how improbable, must be the truth.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 2495
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Oct 2017 at 03:07
Who could have guessed?  Powerful businessmen are often a lousy excuse for a human being?

But, no I don't think that the public flaying is justice, justice is a procedure determining what happened and what should be the consequences in a legal format.  The question is not whether we like the results, but whether or not the procedure has been followed according to the rules.  But, I kind of doubt anything Harvey Weinstein (or his brother Bob) has done is enough to lead to a trial, although civil trials might be in the making.  I doubt it but don't know.
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Oct 2017 at 03:21
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

Who could have guessed?  Powerful businessmen are often a lousy excuse for a human being?

But, no I don't think that the public flaying is justice, justice is a procedure determining what happened and what should be the consequences in a legal format.  The question is not whether we like the results, but whether or not the procedure has been followed according to the rules.  But, I kind of doubt anything Harvey Weinstein (or his brother Bob) has done is enough to lead to a trial, although civil trials might be in the making.  I doubt it but don't know.

Thanks, I agree with you.
Once you eliminate the impossible,
whatever remains,
no matter how improbable, must be the truth.
Back to Top
Dark Warrior View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar
Dark Warrior

Joined: 07 Oct 2017
Location: Colorado
Status: Offline
Points: 93
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dark Warrior Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Oct 2017 at 04:52
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

You've gone way off topic here. We weren't discussing the Kennedy family or anyone else, simply the fact that Weinstein has been punished without ever being charged and convicted.

OK, he's been damned in the court of public opinion, and maybe he deserves it, but some of the commentators so far have him hung drawn and quarterd. Maybe he deserves that too.


Nonsense. It is not 'off topic' at all. But continues to demonstrate my 2 fold point.

1. Its not new.

2. The previously noted examples..ie. personages identified. That are/were and probably continue to be commensurate and complicit in Weinstein's behavior. Harvey is merely the tip of a very old iceberg.

More aptly to the point is that the left only recently admitted to the conduct. And with such a patently and blatantly obvious insincerity imo. That it reeks of the highest form of hypocrisy. Is being understated. Yet they are always willing to point non leftists/liberals at the earliest opportunity for like vile behavior.

Convenient isn't it.

Close friends to the bone. Always willing to continue the cover up until the public outrage becomes so great they fear for their privileges, status, and wealth and power. Then like the proverbial rats fleeing the dying ship...they do. Harvey was such.

Pathetic.


Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Oct 2017 at 06:48
Originally posted by Dark Warrior Dark Warrior wrote:

Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

You've gone way off topic here. We weren't discussing the Kennedy family or anyone else, simply the fact that Weinstein has been punished without ever being charged and convicted.

OK, he's been damned in the court of public opinion, and maybe he deserves it, but some of the commentators so far have him hung drawn and quarterd. Maybe he deserves that too.


Nonsense. It is not 'off topic' at all. But continues to demonstrate my 2 fold point.

1. Its not new.

2. The previously noted examples..ie. personages identified. That are/were and probably continue to be commensurate and complicit in Weinstein's behavior. Harvey is merely the tip of a very old iceberg.

More aptly to the point is that the left only recently admitted to the conduct. And with such a patently and blatantly obvious insincerity imo. That it reeks of the highest form of hypocrisy. Is being understated. Yet they are always willing to point non leftists/liberals at the earliest opportunity for like vile behavior.

Convenient isn't it.

Close friends to the bone. Always willing to continue the cover up until the public outrage becomes so great they fear for their privileges, status, and wealth and power. Then like the proverbial rats fleeing the dying ship...they do. Harvey was such.

Pathetic.



1. Read the OP-Topic: Weinstein - Justice?

2.
Quote . The previously noted examples..ie. personages identified. That are/were and probably continue to be commensurate and complicit in Weinstein's behavior. Harvey is merely the tip of a very old iceberg.

Irrelevant.

3.
Quote More aptly to the point is that the left only recently admitted to the conduct. And with such a patently and blatantly obvious insincerity imo. That it reeks of the highest form of hypocrisy. Is being understated. Yet they are always willing to point non leftists/liberals at the earliest opportunity for like vile behavior. 

Irrelevant.

4.
Quote Close friends to the bone. Always willing to continue the cover up until the public outrage becomes so great they fear for their privileges, status, and wealth and power. Then like the proverbial rats fleeing the dying ship...they do. Harvey was such.

You can always tell when a ship is about to sink, the rats are all running around with a piece of wood between their teeth. The "wood" in this case being either Mea Culpa I should have spoken up, or, alternatively, I didn't know anything about it.
Once you eliminate the impossible,
whatever remains,
no matter how improbable, must be the truth.
Back to Top
Dark Warrior View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar
Dark Warrior

Joined: 07 Oct 2017
Location: Colorado
Status: Offline
Points: 93
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dark Warrior Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Oct 2017 at 07:05
My opinion of Weinstein and the previous nomen and those who continue tp practice this type of behavior is anything but irrelevant. It's pathetic.

Nor is my apt and historically accurate representation of the behavior of the same and countless others irrelevant. That you are unable or perhaps refuse to see the correlation is sad.

The press was saying worse about G. Cleveland contextually reference his alleged bastard child. So once again it's nothing new.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 2495
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Oct 2017 at 23:16
A reporter once asked John F Kennedy, "what have you done for women?"  Kennedy replied, "not enough."

If a reporter asked Harvey Weinstein, the question would be, "what have you done to women? at which Weinstein would beg off and have him talk to his lawyer.

There is a level at which JFK and Robert Kennedy, Ted Kennedy behavior was welcome or at least not to the level of obnoxious.  Maybe that was part of the sign of the times, I have heard that if JFK was active today, he would be accused of statutory rape (under age).  Clinton in general got away with it, except for Jennifer Flowers, and "bimbo eruptions."  Harvey Weinstein is threatening, not because of how severe his activity was (I don't at least hear about rape), but because how wide spread, aggressive and unwelcome it appears to have been.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 1223
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Oct 2017 at 14:41
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

Who could have guessed?  Powerful businessmen are often a lousy excuse for a human being?

But, no I don't think that the public flaying is justice, justice is a procedure determining what happened and what should be the consequences in a legal format.  The question is not whether we like the results, but whether or not the procedure has been followed according to the rules.  But, I kind of doubt anything Harvey Weinstein (or his brother Bob) has done is enough to lead to a trial, although civil trials might be in the making.  I doubt it but don't know.
toyomotor:
Thanks, I agree with you.
Another country may actually drag him into court and yes apparently his brother Bob not implicated until last week has been accused by a journalist. 

Trial would be amusing but when you can sit back and write checks all day, not necessary. Consider all the collateral perverts who get scooped up in this dragnet, lots of people to embarrass. 

Feminist actress Ashley Judd who told the world at the Million Woman March (right after Trump was elected) that she was a "Nasty Woman." HMMM. When it came to Harvey she lost her nasty b***s and did not a thing about it, she offered no acknowledgement of the women who did try to make people aware of Weinstein's permanent stiffy.
The root of all desires is the one desire: to come home, to be at peace. -Jean Klein
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Oct 2017 at 00:33
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

Who could have guessed?  Powerful businessmen are often a lousy excuse for a human being?

But, no I don't think that the public flaying is justice, justice is a procedure determining what happened and what should be the consequences in a legal format.  The question is not whether we like the results, but whether or not the procedure has been followed according to the rules.  But, I kind of doubt anything Harvey Weinstein (or his brother Bob) has done is enough to lead to a trial, although civil trials might be in the making.  I doubt it but don't know.
toyomotor:
Thanks, I agree with you.

Trial would be amusing but when you can sit back and write checks all day, not necessary. Consider all the collateral perverts who get scooped up in this dragnet, lots of people to embarrass. 

Feminist actress Ashley Judd who told the world at the Million Woman March (right after Trump was elected) that she was a "Nasty Woman." HMMM. When it came to Harvey she lost her nasty b***s and did not a thing about it, she offered no acknowledgement of the women who did try to make people aware of Weinstein's permanent stiffy.

I didn't hear about the Million Womens March.

In this context, what is meant by "nasty woman"?

What does HMMM represent? It's a new one on me.

Weinstein's "woody"? 


Once you eliminate the impossible,
whatever remains,
no matter how improbable, must be the truth.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 1223
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Oct 2017 at 14:01

Okay, so Trump called Hillary a "Nasty Woman" towards the end of the campaign.

The march happened in January right after Trump took office. Ashley Judd is the actress who made a big speech at the march and kept calling herself a "Nasty Woman" to poke at Trump.

HMMMM is simply HMMMM no acronym just 'oh really?'

LOL Weinstein's woody is the reason he can't walk out of a room without using his woody to poke at someone. Probably a nasty woman. Wink

*Ashley admits to being aware of Weinstein's behavior in a general sense but even after he cornered her in a hotel room she did not "speak out" against the evil male member. She only spoke up after Weinstein was fired and could no longer influence her career. So very Brave.



Edited by Vanuatu - 22 Oct 2017 at 14:08
The root of all desires is the one desire: to come home, to be at peace. -Jean Klein
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Oct 2017 at 14:04
'oh really?'Confused
Once you eliminate the impossible,
whatever remains,
no matter how improbable, must be the truth.
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 Oct 2017 at 00:42
As I understand it, in the US vernacular, the word "nasty" can mean a variety of things' e.g.

a. Skank- dirty smelly morally loose;

b. Fiercely determined;

c. fashionable.

The Oxford Dictionary describes "nasty" as

Quote

unpleasant, disagreeable, disgusting, distasteful, awful, dreadful, horrible, terrible, vile, foul, abominable, frightful, loathsome, revolting, repulsive, odious, sickening, nauseating, nauseous, repellent, repugnant, horrendous, hideous, appalling, atrocious, offensive, objectionable, obnoxious, unpalatable, unsavoury, unappetizing, off-putting, uninviting, dirty, filthy, squalid

noxious, evil-smelling, foul-smelling, smelly, stinking, rank, rancid, fetid, malodorous, acrid

informal ghastly, horrid, gruesome, putrid, diabolical, yucky, sick-making, God-awful, gross, icky, stinky

British informal beastly, grotty, whiffy, pongy, niffy

North American informal lousy, skanky, funky

Australian informal on the nose

literary noisome, mephitic

archaic disgustful, loathly

rare miasmal, olid


In what contect was "nasty used in your post?

Once you eliminate the impossible,
whatever remains,
no matter how improbable, must be the truth.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 1223
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 Oct 2017 at 03:48
I'll leave that up to you. 


The root of all desires is the one desire: to come home, to be at peace. -Jean Klein
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 Oct 2017 at 04:43
I wasn't being picky, it's just that between the two countries, word usage varies to the extent that it can be taken out of context. For example, in Australia, the word nasty means rude, ignorant, distasteful.

I was interested to know what you meant by nasty within the context of your post.

Bitchy?
Aggressive?
Skanky?

I just can't tell.Smile


Edited by toyomotor - 23 Oct 2017 at 04:44
Once you eliminate the impossible,
whatever remains,
no matter how improbable, must be the truth.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 2495
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 Oct 2017 at 23:49
Janet Jackson has a song, something like entitled "Nasty Girl"

I think you might interpret it as feisty, "uppity," not much for convention, hot.  Aggressive/assertive would match to some degree, a woman who is aggressive, and you like her being aggressive, although she could also be nasty because she is aggressive, and a total turn-off.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 2495
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Oct 2017 at 00:15
I had dinner with two sisters last night, and asked them about the Weinstein brouhaha.  They were not surprised by it, and for that matter figured that was how Hollywood worked (casting couch).  That may be the view of much of the middle of America, you know, the part you got to fly over, to get from one (liberal) coast to the other.

We talked about a good movie called "Swimming with Sharks" about a personal assistant to a movie executive.  It does not have a sexual element, (although it has a romantic interest for the young protagonist), but otherwise the executive is a real monster.

Like all animals, Harvey and Bob Weinstein occupy an environmental niche, and in their case their niche has been quite successful for them.  But the worst thing that can happen to an animal (for survival) is habitat destruction, and they apparently have had a "friendly environment" for a long time.  So here we have again the French police captain in Casablanca, saying, "I am shocked that there is gambling going on in this place."

But Hollywood has always believed in high moral standards, and Elizabeth Taylor believed in the institution of marriage, which is why she got married 5 times.  On the other hand, one should recognize Billy Crystal who has been married to the same woman all of his life, and the deceased Patrick Swayze who also was monogamous (but not serial monogamous).  The behavior of someone getting tired of an old model, and trade it in for a new one, does not mitigate in any way, predatory behavior, but when the atmosphere is a matter of "whatever floats your boat," it is harder separate in the static, criminal behavior from the "merely" immoral or unconventional.
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Oct 2017 at 00:30
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

Janet Jackson has a song, something like entitled "Nasty Girl"

I think you might interpret it as feisty, "uppity," not much for convention, hot.  Aggressive/assertive would match to some degree, a woman who is aggressive, and you like her being aggressive, although she could also be nasty because she is aggressive, and a total turn-off.

OK. Thanks. Just a matter of different use of the word.
Once you eliminate the impossible,
whatever remains,
no matter how improbable, must be the truth.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 1223
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Oct 2017 at 13:36
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

Janet Jackson has a song, something like entitled "Nasty Girl"

I think you might interpret it as feisty, "uppity," not much for convention, hot.  Aggressive/assertive would match to some degree, a woman who is aggressive, and you like her being aggressive, although she could also be nasty because she is aggressive, and a total turn-off.

OK. Thanks. Just a matter of different use of the word.

Not sure it was different, she was a lot like Hillary! Ashley have a -weakness_ for_skin Wink 

But glad you got take in all of that feminine "POWER!" whoo!


The root of all desires is the one desire: to come home, to be at peace. -Jean Klein
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 2495
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Oct 2017 at 00:40
Actually, the clip you have of Ashley Judd has hear saying that she is privileged to give the message of a 19 year old, from, well some Southern city (Tennessee?).  So Ashley Judd is not saying that she (Ashley Judd) is nasty.  She is "channelling" some 19 year old black woman from TN(?).  I did not watch it to the end.  She was introduced by Michael Moore, at a women's March????  Michael Moore is a propagandist for the left who uses gotcha tactics that he would not take himself.  But, I am sure that for the promoters of the event, Michael Moore advocates all the correct causes, and so I guess that makes him qualified.

For those outside of the US, they should note that the speech is filmed by CSPAN, which is one of the two US congressional channels.  It makes sense that CSPAN would cover the event, I think they covered Glenn Beck's rally too (but I am not sure of that).  It is something of political interest to some all over the nation.  Most of what they do is boring congressional speeches, boring to those seeking mere entertainment, and not concerned about the issues on the congressional floor. 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.