Harvey Weinstein’s lawyer said Saturday a woman having sex with a Hollywood producer to advance her career is “not rape”, in a British newspaper interview on the eve of the Oscars.
“If a woman decides that she needs to have sex with a Hollywood producer to advance her career and actually does it and finds the whole thing offensive, that’s not rape,” he told The Times.
“You made a conscious decision that you’re willing to do something that is personally offensive in order to advance your career,” he added.
Brafman told The Times his client’s behaviour was reflective of the broader culture in the industry: “The casting couch in Hollywood was not invented by Harvey Weinstein.”
Read the article HERE.
@FarmWife, sorry to post this here but the old thread appears closed, at least to me. Can’t post. I was at work yesterday until late and out all this morning. Forgive this late and involved answer but yours is a very good question and deserves the best possible answer.
“Can a person kill animal abusers such as this guy and then ask God for forgiveness later and still get into Heaven?”
First we need to establish who this guy is.
Everyone today is in either one of two groups: Forgiven/justified/”in Christ” or unsaved/lost/”children of wrath.” No middle ground, no gray area. Also, no “process of salvation” in Paul’s doctrine; no spectrum of more saved or less saved. We’re all one or the other. WHICH we are, God has left up to each of us to decide (which is precisely why God’s condemnation of all unbelief will be perfectly just…everyone who hears CAN believe but most won’t).
So to your question, a person who murders someone else, for any reason, is already either lost, or he is saved. Same goes for adulterers, fornicators, thieves, liars, slanderers, etc etc etc, not just murder.
So…
a. If he’s lost, murdering another is just one more sin that will be evidence against him when he stands before the Throne. That murder won’t make him any more lost than he already is. But being struck with guilt and asking God to forgive that one sin won’t save him UNLESS he’s believing the saving Good News with regard to ALL his sin, not just the one murder. In that case, he moves from death to life and is forgiven all sins (Colossians 2:13) and for him, there is now no condemnation (Romans 8:1) because he’s now a child of God in Christ.
b. If he’s saved, he’s already forgiven all trespasses and so is not under possible condemnation unto Hell (Romans 8:1)…if he were, then all sins are NOT forgiven and the Bible is a book of lies and God cannot be believed. That is not the case, thankfully. HOWEVER, if a believer were to commit murder, or any other sin, his testimony of Christ is damaged, he isn’t walking by the Spirit of Christ, and he could well lose his inheritance in the Kingdom of the Son where every saved person already lives (Paul warns of this potential loss of inheritance – but not loss of forgiveness – more than once).
Let me emphasize that fact: unlike Catholic and much Protestant doctrine, Paul never says that that means he will become lost again and maybe go to Hell. Christ dealt with ALL sin at the Cross. NOTHING was left out, not even his hypothetical murder. And since he’s been declared dead to God’s condemning Law (Romans ch. 4-8) AND justified in Christ, he’s unable to be condemned for sins of the flesh.
So according to what Paul says happens to a person when they’re saved, the saved murderer will remain saved because he’s already forgiven and justified, and that status cannot be lost lest God be a liar…and God cannot lie.
But rest assured that God will deal with him — he’s not “off the hook.”
That’s as concisely as I could put it, I apologize that I couldn’t make it shorter.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/2018/03/01/oscars-street-artists-unveil-giant-bathrobe-clad-harvey-weinstein-casting-couch-statue/
Good tack there Harvey… Stick with that “the starlets are whores” narrative. Even if it’s true in some cases, it will enrage virtually every woman in the country who cares about the case.
I was talking to a friend a couple of weeks ago who is a good friend of a major studio executive. Actually, I think he is a former exec, retired after a long and fruitful career, and as he said probably a good thing at this point in time.
He kept tabs on the young womens’ contract renewal dates, and a couple of months before renewal each would come calling. Likely to more than one exec – in fact his superior, a well-known CEO, said he didn’t mind this guy bedding the ladies because he had already bedded them.
Is that forced sex or mutual benefit? I know I would never do such a thing, we all know such a person is a dinosaur in this age (right???), but many ladies were willing to trade for a nice salary.
It’s not rape, it’s prostitution, which should be legal by the way.
I care about the case. I am not enraged. Women can’t have it both ways. Either you have moral conviction, ethics and self-determination or you don’t. No one can force you to do something that violates your convictions. If you want a career so badly that you would even THINK about having sex with a person with power over your life, you have lost all moral clarity. These starlets who walk down the carpet wearing plastic wrap and paper stickers have no right to say “Don’t objectify me!” Argh! No, actually…AARRRGGHH!
Having said the above, another friend filed charges with LAPD against Roman Polanski last year for his sexual assault on her when she was 10 years old. Her mother left her alone with Polanski, she considers her mother complicit in the assault. LAPD later dropped them, particularly due to the incident being over 40 years ago. I talked with her a couple of days ago about the challenges in getting someone, particularly a child but even and adult, to come forward with charges when she has been told that doing so would make her a bad person, with the knowledge that the whole world would know, and with a significant likelihood that her life would be ruined to an even greater degree and the perpetrator very well may get away. Not something a child or person with low self-esteem can really handle.
So there are definitely differing situations.
Pot… meet kettle. 🙄
If a child up to say 16 (arbitrary) or mentally incompetent is put into a situation where they are alone with someone who could weild power over them, then their parent or “handler” is an accomplice as far as I’m concerned. Anyone over16 ( arbitrary) is looking to up her career by any means possible. Yes, that is prostition. Harsh – yes.
this joke is decades old
guy asks “would you have sex w/ me for 10 million dollars?”
woman thinks a minute and answers “yes”
then guy ask her “would you have sex w/ me for 25 cents?”
woman is offended and says “of course not, what do you think I am?”
man answers “we’ve established that, we’re just negotiating price”
Another “Which comes first the Chicken or the Egg” question:
Which comes first
1. A Hollywood scumbag producer offering a movie part for sex?
or
2. A Hollywood starlet whore offering sex for a movie part?
inquiring minds want to know!!!!!!
So the matriarchy’s logic is “She’s too mentally unstable to say no to whoring herself. But she’s too mentally stable to deny her her choice of career.” M’Kay. Sorry… Fierce!