to think that Kate Winslet is a phoney hypocrite?

[southeastdweller]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-42824594

As far as I know she worked with child rapist Polanski willingly. I don't think Woody Allen pulled a gun to her head to do her latest film.

And the same for Hayley Atwell, Colin Firth etc. Why speak up NOW? They all knew of the Allen allegations when they worked for him.

"Revolting that so many people are not prepared to say "Harvey Weinstein, Roman Polanski and co are sickening individuals who are 100% responsible for their crimes and creation of an inherently male-controlled industry that squashes women into their place" with no further qualifiers."

Where has that not happened?

I think the point you've missed in your patronising diatribe is that if you do call a rapist a rapist and then you undermine your good work and use of power to end it by working with another then you are a hypocrite.

Winslet is in no way responsible for the crimes of rapists. If she endorses them after they've been found guilty then she condones their behaviour and no amount of twisting logic to favour your all-powerful patriarchy argument will hold water.

Winslet (and others) hypocrisy and the crimes of others are not mutually exclusive and can be viewed as entirely independent.

Where has that not happened?

In a thread that focuses on Kate Winslet, for a start, and dismisses a counter response as a 'patronising diatribe'.

Yorick, it doesn't help women to treat us as if we are incapable of any wrongdoing. HW and RP etc are totally responsible for what they did. It's not adding a qualifier to say that KW and MS are responsible for their own actions too.
This thread has focussed on women actors because they are the ones who are being very vocal in jumping on the Me Too bandwagon having publicly praised and supported men who have done vile things.
Like I said, KW didn't have to work with RP. It was a choice freely made. I reserve the right to judge that. No one is judging her in isolation and not judging everyone else who willingly worked with him.

Yorrik -you made the point for me. This is a thread which focuses on Kate Winslet and other actresses (and actors).

No one has said anywhere (feel free to quote someone if I missed it) that Polanski et al are not 100% to blame.

Hypocrisy and sex crimes are different. Do you see?

Yes yes, women must not be passive flowers, women aren't perfect, a sodding hashtag campaign that actually brought this issue to public awareness is a bandwagon, we are totally not blaming women etc etc.

Institutional power imbalances and the constant minimising and normalising of abuse never cause people to lose sight of what's really happening and who's really responsible because women not passive flowers, women not perfect etc etc.

In other words, powerful men behave like shits and entire industries and careers are built on women knowing their place but women aren't passive flowers, aren't perfect, blah blah fucking blah.

I can't be arsed. I really don't blame actresses for not risking their reputations and careers fighting this shit before it was identified as a massive fucking problem. I can't bear the constant pretzeling, misdirection and downright turdness even on an anonymous website.

"I can't be arsed."

Writing cohesively?

"I really don't blame actresses for not risking their reputations and careers fighting this shit before it was identified as a massive fucking problem."

Oprah and Winslet aren't exactly in this category now, are they? Especially wrt Winslet in her latest Allen film.

I’m sure it was Winslet who said something like “you just don’t turn down working with genius like Polanski”.

At the height of her career she made a film with a convicted child rapist. I don’t think it’s unfair to say she could have turned down that project and taken another. She didn’t have to speak out. She could have just said no and if needs be a publicist could have crafted a carefully worded reason.

I am capable of separating the anger I feel towards RP for his crimes and knowing he is completely responsible, and the annoyance with KW who has seemingly jumped on a bandwagon.

I expect she was exploited as a young woman. Possibly still is now. But if she didn’t have any power back then she certainly had agency.

KW probably is probably a hypocrite...then again we all are. Anyone who's heard someone say anything remotely sexist/racist/homophobic in any aspect of their life (work/home/public transport) and not immediately stood up and called them out on this behavior. Which is all of us.

A lot of the time it might be self preservation (not wise to confront a drunk spouting racist remarks at 3am on a Sat) but whatever the reason we've all seen unsavory behavior at some point in our life and chose not to do anything.

So we can all claim to be holy than thou and slate KW, but the irony is we're all phoney hypocrites.

Writing cohesively?

Oh! Not an ad hominem! I beg you, anything but an ad hominem! I'm melting! Meeeelting!

There are almost no women in Hollywood who aren't dispensable, especially as, unlike men, they are not allowed to age. And of those who are, they are in an industry which is, as I've said, controlled by about five men. They have been surrounded by a culture that minimises and normalises this abuse almost as much as wider society does. No, you cannot start spreading blame from the abusers and their institutional power because women aren't passive flowers or the individual is so powerful or any of this other bollocks.

And when you start a shitty thread focusing on an actress who didn't torpedo her career by shouting about it before it was marginally acceptable - or you make a shitty post to that effect within said shitty thread - yes, you are part of the shitty problem.

And you are contributing to the culture where women are damned if they do and damned if they don't, unless they get the timing spot on.

Perhaps you would totally bring them to their knees even if it cost you your career. Even if you were able to see through the institutional power imbalance and normalising and brainwashing (you're not - you wouldn't be directing this blame at women if you were). In which case, go get a career in Hollywood. The institutional abuse in there is down to women not being brave enough, you know.

Most of us haven't actively praised and supported child rapists though. That put her in a different category imo

Yorick, not one person has said KW should have torpedoed her career. What we have said is that she wasn't without power and choice, when it csme to msking tbe Polanski film and she chose to do it anyway, knowing what he is. And now, she is aligning herself with the very women she didn't give a shit about when she made that choice.

Yorrik I suspect you're tipsy. tiiiiiiiiiiiiiipsy! There's got to be some reason for your inability to read what other posters have written.

The Latin's cute, don't get me wrong, but there was no ad hominem as there wasn't a cohesive argument to ignore. Poisoning the well, perhaps but you clearly have a bee in your bonnet and are simply making homo paleas attacks. That's Latin for straw man.*

*I think. My Latin was always rubbish.

So we can all claim to be holy than thou and slate KW, but the irony is we're all phoney hypocrites

The difference here, though, is that most of us wouldn’t choose to work with someone we knew was a child rapist.

Well it started as a debate where women were being blamed, directly and indirectly, for male sex crimes in a male-controlled industry. This pissed me off, and I responded. It then stopped being a debate and became a load of irrelevant ad hominems about everything else except what actually matters.

I don't really expect better from people who focus on women's actions when men prey on them (which is indirectly blaming them), so I can't say I'm disappointed or surprised.

I can say, though, that when the argument "The predators are 100% responsible, stop your shitty misogynistic misdirection and blame spreading" and the reply is "herp derp drunk, herp derp Latin, herp derp women should xyz", it's just fucking inane. I'll debate with a lot of people, but not Beavis and Butthead. Not on a topic that actually matters.

Yorick, people are not obliged to agree with you and we are not the ones descending into name calling and insults.
You seem to think all women are victims, their choices are not freely made and therefore they cannot be held accountable for the shitty things they do. Well none of us grew up in a vacuum and many of us would have not made the particular career choice that certain people made.
Honestly, criticising that choice and calling hypocrite, really does not dilute the level of blame directed to the perpetratous of these crimes.

Pidlan. Don’t worry - there are many male actors/whatevers for whom I harbour an irrational loathing. It’s not just KW in particular or females in general.

I am not blaming women, I am pointing out that the many men and women, who knew exactly what he was like, who had the power to make a stand in a public place arena , the Oscars, to call hw out on HIS vile behaviour, didn’t do so!. He is to blame for his behaviour, but there are plenty who should hang their heads in shame for not standing up. Look at Seth Macfarlane, he started the ball rolling, and good on him.

Shall I start a thread about how terrible it is that Ewan McGregor, Pierce Bronson, Tom Wilkinson, JimBelushi, etc worked with RP in 2010?
Or how awful it is that Tom Hiddleston, Owen Wilson etc worked with WA? Would that make it better for you Yorick? ! They are all as bad as each other.

But Streep, Winslet, Oprah etc are women, and this is a forum mainly for women, and most of us dearly hope that women as famous as they are will use their positions wisely and to support other women.

I am so fed up with women focusing on women not having done anything, rather than the men who have abused and raped.

Sure, but to be clear, this thread isn’t about that.

I don't think any woman has been criticised for not being able to speak out. What some women have been criticised for, is their active support of abusers (which was a freely made choice ) and for using the MeToo movement to make themselves look good. That insults every genuine victim.

Yorrick and cupofcake I totally agree. Many posters not understanding why Kate Winslet couldve initially excused polanskis behaviour by blaming the girl for so long before changing her mind but they themselves are expressing anger at a woman over a mans behaviour instead of focusing on the man himself. That is how deeply embedded this issue is in our society. And that is why it takes some women a long time to realise who the anger should be directed at and who they should stand up to.

I mean it is so not helpful to turn on women who are supporting the #metoo movement. None of us personally knwo Kate Winslet and so we should give her motivations the benefit of the doubt. Maybe she was misguided and has now realised the error of her ways, maybe she was just pressured and now feels strong enough to stand up to people? We dont know really and by focusing anger on her we make it less likely that other women who have originally supported abusers but now are starting to realise that they shouldnt and feel supported in standing up to them, to turn around and speak out against them.
Its not beneficial to anyone to focus anger on women like Kate.
All our anger should be focused on the perpetrators.