Roasting Comedians

[Berzerker]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/late-...llegations-for-now?source=twitter&via=desktop

Bigshot Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein (I've seen a few of his movies no doubt) appears to have a problem...and now so do comedians hosting late night entertainment shows. Harvey is alleged to have repeatedly sexually harassed women and the comedians were slow to respond with their humorous assessments. Trevor Noah did but the others gave Weinstein a temporary pass and its costing them.

Some of these comedians were helped in their careers by Weinstein and they're on the same ideological page so I can understand why they're not enthusiastic about ripping the guy, but their silence discredits them. How can they jump at the chance to criticize Bill O'Reilly and Roger Ailles for example while they look the other way for their friends in high places? Well, they did that for Bill Clinton too until they couldn't ignore his history.

Anyway, there is a 'natural' tendency to favor people you know and like, true? But the Golden Rule would have me treat others as I'd be treated. Is there a hypocrisy to this unequal treatment? How do I condemn and ridicule one group of sexual harassers while ignoring the group closer to home? Some stranger commits a crime and its easy to pass judgement...

 

[bernie14]

well, some may find humor poking fun at/ridiculing perpetrators of sexual harassment but weinstein is a serial rapist which is not so funny

 

[Gori the Grey]

It's absolutely crucial that liberals speak out against this. If we let a case like this slide, who knows what might happen? Another rich and powerful person might misuse his power to sexually assault young women. Where would it stop? Why, it could get so bad, that it could come out that a person running for president was just such a sexual predator. If liberals don't speak out against the Weinstein case, sixty-three million Americans could turn a blind eye to such news and vote to elect just such a person for president!

Oh, wait, that already happened? Well, Weinstein can get in line for my ire, then.

Behind the sixty-three million people who voted for such a person to be president.

 

[Berzerker]

I suspect many Trump supporters dont care much about sexual harassment, thats more of a liberal cause...except when it isn't

Of course Trump's supporters might have a different opinion if it was their family and friends being harassed. Oh yeah, Hillary voted to invade Iraq, so... You're not gonna win a "he's worse" debate.

 

[Perfection]

Harvey Weinstein might ne an industry big shot but he's not much of a household name. So joking about it might not be as popular.

 

[bernie14]

It's absolutely crucial that liberals speak out against this. If we let a case like this slide, who knows what might happen? Another rich and powerful person might misuse his power to sexually assault young women. Where would it stop? Why, it could get so bad, that it could come out that a person running for president was just such a sexual predator. If liberals don't speak out against the Weinstein case, sixty-three million Americans could turn a blind eye to such news and vote to elect just such a person for president!

Oh, wait, that already happened? Well, Weinstein can get in line for my ire, then.

Behind the sixty-three million people who voted for such a person to be president.

nah, trump is jv compared to weinstein...besides Kennedy and Clinton already cleared that hurdle for potus.....

This guy weinstein.....even seems like a racist...apparently, didn't even have the decency to sexually assault or harrass any woc!!

 

[Synobun]

The issue with Weinstein is that the people best equipped to speak out against him are also the people best positioned to lose everything if it doesn't work out. Hollywood is an exceptionally insular industry that possesses its own unique society. It takes a lot of luck to make it even if you have a steamroller of a family legacy to back you up. The side effect of this type of industry is that you can't speak out lest you suffer the consequences.

There were many people who tried to publicly shame a list of actors who made no comment on the lawsuits/allegations/drama and I personally felt it was ill-placed. Harvey is probably guilty, there's simply way too many 'coincidences' to really suggest otherwise, but the problem many actors (and actresses) face here is that if this doesn't work out, if Harvey and his ilk aren't ousted from their hiding holes, each and every single person that spoke out will probably find themselves severely disadvantaged in the industry for the rest of their lives. For some this meant/will mean being relegated to second rate gigs. For others it means being blacklisted out of the industry entirely. It's difficult to speak out if your entire livelihood is on the line.

This viewpoint was thankfully verified when Terry Crews spoke out about his own experiences. Terry is a big, buff guy. But beyond his physicality, he's also a very candid individual. He speaks out, he's generally honest, and he's become somewhat of a role model for many people. And even Terry, a man with all these physical and emotional traits, remained silent after an isolated event. One of the reasons cited is that he would probably lose everything if he did. It is not unreasonable to suggest that those who were more directly and intimately victimized by Weinstein and his ilk would be even more terrified of speaking out and likely have more at risk.

I hope some damning evidence comes out that all but puts the nail in the coffin for Harvey Weinstein and also opens the door at exposing others who are involved in the practice. I think once that happens, a floodgate will open of actors, actresses, and others in the industry coming out with their stories and with information about what they know. Until then, as long as there's a chance that Weinstein and his kind might wriggle their way out of it, I doubt very many will take the risk.

Show biz is a treacherous environment. You have to be extremely careful in the bears you poke, especially when the bears hold deep and undying grudges with the power to exact them.

 

[Zkribbler]

t their silence discredits them. How can they jump at the chance to criticize Bill O'Reilly and Roger Ailles for example while they look the other way for their friends in high places?

Names? Incidents? ...of course not.

 

[bernie14]

fwiw, some of ben affleck's ancestors were actual slave owners

 

[warpus]

their silence discredits them.

This is an extremely weak argument. Just because you don't go on air and make fun of somebody doesn't mean you don't disagree with their actions.

 

[bernie14]

snitches get stitches

 

[metatron]

This is an extremely weak argument. Just because you don't go on air and make fun of somebody doesn't mean you don't disagree with their actions.

So, what to make of Mr. Noah?
He merely disagreed a bit more, i suppose?

 

[warpus]

I read what he wrote and he pretty much said the guy is too ugly for carnal relations with anyone. So I'm not sure what you mean

 

[Berzerker]

This is an extremely weak argument. Just because you don't go on air and make fun of somebody doesn't mean you don't disagree with their actions.

but it does mean you're being hypocritical when you do it to other people

 

[warpus]

but it does mean you're being hypocritical when you do it to other people

How so?

And do you seriously expect a comedian to say negative things about every single bad thing that happens?