Alexandra Laliberte, the organizer of Actor's Hour, told BuzzFeed News it was the second time Weinstein had turned up to one of her events. Laliberte added that she doesn't have a security team, and rather than turn Weinstein away, she thought the community could address him.Allow me to say fuck that noise. You should not be "inviting" predators in your space, and expect that victims will see it as safe.
"I welcome all walks of life into my space," she said.
When asked why she allowed Weinstein to attend an event specifically intended to support and encourage young actors when he has been accused of sexually assaulting and harassing dozens of them, Laliberte told BuzzFeed News: "I protect them by freedom of speech."
In the last 24 hours I¡¯ve moments in which my personal fear and sadness has urged me to respond defensively. But I want to stay as open as I can through this process, especially with the people who have trusted me and who feel let down. I want to sincerely apologize to any people - male ore female - who were re-traumatized, hurt, or felt disrespected this week at Actors HourWorth a read.
To state what should be obvious, it does not violate anybody's "due process" rights to be criticized, onstage or off, at a comedy club. Harvey Weinstein is entitled to a presumption of innocence in a court of law; he is not entitled to the presumption that dozens of women are lying about him when he interacts with other private individuals in public. As North says, the idea that powerful men credibly accused of abusing women are entitled to freedom from social sanction unless they've been convicted of a crime in a court of law is both absurd and pernicious.posted by tonycpsu at 10:50 AM on October 26, 2019 [5 favorites]
Another example of this phenomenon is an awful recent article by Emily Yoffe, which inter alia asserts that a Jonathan Kaiman's "due process" rights were violated when he was fired after a three month investigation determined that charges of sexual misconduct by other journalists were credible. Again, it's just amazing what "due process" protections people pretend to think American workers are generally entitled to whenever a white guy is a accused of a sex-related offense. Even better is that this article was published in Reason. My questions are 1)what "due process" rights do the editors think workers are entitled to before being terminated and 2)should these rights be available to people other than white guys accused of sexual misconduct? I think we can be pretty confident that they haven't embraced Elizabeth Anderson and come out against at-will employment.
By the way, a special Harvey Weinstein Due Process Award goes to Caitlin Flanagan, who grossly smeared one of Kaiman's accusers ¨C the journalist Felicia Somnez ¨C while being almost proud of having no idea what the facts of the case were, but going ahead and fitting them around misogynist 80s movie tropes anyway.
Imagine what that felt like for everyone who wasn't down with courting [rapists]. Imagine what it was like for anyone with a history of abuse. Imagine what is like now for his victims to know he could be invited warmly into these spaces.posted by non canadian guy at 3:27 PM on October 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
« Older What A Time. What A World This Was. What A Loss. | All this information used to be ephemeral Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Reclusive Novelist Thomas Pynchon at 10:19 AM on October 25, 2019 [39 favorites]