The Weinstein effect

Unfortunately, I think the UK led with an expose of the wicked kind of awful abuse. It always surprised me that there were not more stories from across the pond. There is of course the Bill Cosby matter, but by sheer volume of numbers, I was surprised more stories have not emerged from the US.

Of course we must be careful of saying too much, because innocent people like for example Paul Gambaccini have been caught up in this type of investigation. I think though, in the case of Weinstein, the number of high profile people who have made public statements indicate the level of his abuse.

I can't answer your original question paplazaroo, except to say, I would think it quite high regrettably.

JS? Who that?

Jimmy S.

If you haven't seen it yet, Lucy Prebble (the playwright who wrote Enron and The Effect) has written an interesting article about Weinstein, but also alludes to the London theatre scene: www.lrb.co.uk/2017/10/13/lucy-prebble/short-cuts

This is very ironic 2 people have been accused of the most heinous and egricious crimes in society of sexual molestation, one has been vilified in the press, which seems to be on the mark and justified - the other becomes the 45th President of the United States.

Hmmm. Now that Weinstein has been named it is difficult for other victims to come out and name other people who have abused them. It looks like, '..and me...' So it doesn’t necessarily help to have Ms Prebble add her two penny worth. Of course, she is capable of writing the screenplay.

I’m not aware that theatre has anything like the same problem. One of the examples in Prebble’s article is obvious (and well known) but I am certainly not aware of persistent rumours of sexual assault or of anybody in a significant position of power threatening to destroy careers if they don’t keep quiet about those assaults.

I actually found Prebble’s article slightly uncomfortable because it seemed to include a lot of hints without any real personal experience to back it up. It’s not unusual to meet somebody for dinner or drinks to discuss work. Neither is it unusual for younger actors or theatre professionals to have affairs with older directors etc. Nobody should work with (or employ) somebody who asks actresses what colour knickers they are wearing, and I hope that Prebble is either talking about something that happened a long time ago or that anybody with personal experience of it will speak out to ensure that the director in question is held accountable.

It may be the "rumours" have not reached the general public (or even ardent and well-informed theatre-goers), but within the industry all this stuff is absolutely an open secret.

Lucy's one of the best people I know, and her article has done a lot of good in supporting and encouraging people to speak up. 

Jez has thrown his 2c in www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41594764?SThisFB

Does there need to be an explicit threat? I thought it was understood that when someone abuses a position of authority the very fact that it is an abuse of authority carries an implied "If you leak word of this then things will not go well for you". If there wasn't a threat of some sort then the abuse couldn't happen.

I find the whole thing a mess.

I am in no way a defender of Harvey Weinstein but, as of yet, all that is known is his own admission of inappropriate behaviour that can be rightly termed sexual harassment. He hasn't yet been charged with any crime let alone convicted.

Trial by Twitter is completely unacceptable. Social media is allowing all sorts of allegations to be made in the open with no control or oversight.

Anyone who makes their claim to being a victim to the press before reporting it to the authorities is doing things the wrong way round in my opinion.

If he is guilty of only one of the crimes being alleged then he should face the consequences. If he is guilty of all of them then it will be one of the major scandals in modern entertainment history.

But I cannot help having a nagging suspicion that some of the victims may be nothing of the sort and are using this as an opportunity for self-promotion and claiming victimhood. I very much hope I am wrong in that - but we have seen situations like this before where historical abuse claims are made, the damage done to the alleged perpetrator - only for the claims to be shown to be without foundation.

There is certainly no doubt that Weinstein is an unpleasant sleazeball. His actions may have been criminal - but until those things have been tested by the courts, then they are allegations and not facts. I fully accept that historical abuse cases are difficult to prove - but every effort must be made to fully investigate and then prosecute if the evidence justifies such a step.

Everyone should allow the legal processes to take place and to keep their comments to themselves until the real rather than alleged picture emerges.

Wont be a problem as the jury once sworn will be carefully warned by the judge. Thats the important bit they all take an oath or affirm. Any jury member who might say or do something off piste is reported.