Mixing drugs and alcohol is not going to make you do crazy things, rather it is going to lower your inhibitions so if you are predisposed to sexual assault you are less likely to care about the consequences.
Even if someone accepted that excuse, the obvious answer is “Then don’t combine them.”
I do think Terry Crews coming forward is extremely important because it adds a new dimension for putting the lie to misogynistic victim blaming and he quite eloquently explains how it’s about abuse of power and privlage. As someone with an amazing partner in life, I think he’s also extremely fortunate to have an amazing and loving wife both to guide him through what she’s doubtless dealt with her whole life and to be his rock.
6 Likes
He tells many stories of outrageous behavior just like this at various parties his parents and family friends held.
Everything that goes in in Hollywood goes on in DC…that, and worse, because the levels of wealth and power are far higher in DC than in L.A.
I’d guess that there are people in Washington right now who are desperately hoping the wreckage on the west coast will keep the tide from reaching them.
And there are probably also people there who aren’t worried at all, because they’re untouchable.
4 Likes
I’m going to go with some sort of drug intoxication.
1 Like
Alcohol abuse is a serious issue, but in any case it won’t absolve Venit. There may be good public policy that can shrink or mitigate the harms of a culture of heavy drinking, but individuals who commit crimes still need to be dealt with as individuals. I think the “I was drunk” excuse has fallen out of favour as a criminal defense.
Willingly impairing yourself in public where one can become a nuisance or even a potential danger is enough of a reason to hold those that get drunk or high accountable. It’s not like someone forced the guy to drink until he blacked out and did something crazy. I think that’s the important factor in determining guilt for cases like these, not a lawyer so i can’t say for sure but even then as far as public opinion goes the guy has no excuse for harassing Terry Crews nor does anyone else that has done something like this to anyone else.
Yes. In order to make a case that you weren’t responsible you need really exceptional circumstances, and in all cases if you are going to go down that road of saying, “I wasn’t myself because…” you better not have acted that way before or since.
As far as I can tell Venit hasn’t offered a public defense at all. That might be in his best interests. We’ve seen a lot of these cases play out over the past weeks, and when people defend themselves, there’s always another accuser, and another, and another.
2 Likes
Granted, but at the same time, what angers me about, say, a drunk driver isn’t that they should know better than to drive while drunk, it’s that they didn’t plan ahead and leave their car at home; it’s the choice they made while sober that is the ethical error.
So if I go to a party and someone is drunk, and they behave inappropriately, I tend to cut them some slack.
And the article suggested “medication” could be a factor Venit raises as an “excuse”; I don’t find that particularly funny, as some prescription medications can adversely impact behaviour and impulse control.
“Willingly impairing yourself” is exactly the issue – haven’t you ever had one drink too many and not realised it until the booze hits your brain? Didn’t eat enough that day, or hydrate properly, or maybe a friend insisted on doing a shot at the bar and you were just trying to be polite, and now you’re a little further gone than you want to be? Or seen that person having a few too many drinks, and then something from within their subconscious bubbles up, and they act totally strange, maybe even totally out of character?
I’m not saying it’s a blanket excuse for being an insufferable asshole, but when at a party, things like this might happen and the person who behaved inappropriately might not have intended to behave that way. Intent matters.
I don’t agree. It is a conscious decision to drink in public and any ramifications from making that choice is on that particular person, not eating enough or not being aware of how hard a shot is going to hit them does not recuse someone of responsibility from their choices. Every adult knows the effect of alcohol, being an idiot about it is on them and is not an excuse.
1 Like
I’m not talking about absolution. I’m just saying intent matters – and you can’t reliably predict what will happen when you’re drinking, since lots of variables can kick in. For example, at some parties they have servers who top off your wine – I’ve certainly pointed out to friends that they haven’t been keeping track of how much they are drinking because their glass keeps getting topped off while they’re not looking.
If you intend to get smashed and then plan on being a belligerent jerk as well, that’s terrible. But if you didn’t intend to – and that can happen – I think we have to evaluate those cases differently.
(Again, I doubt that this is the case with Venit, but the particulars matter surely).
Exactly, and we’re talking about an adult with big boy responsibilities. Saying “i got drunk and i didn’t know what i was doing” is a bullshit response. I wouldn’t even begin to consider it an excuse.
1 Like
I doubt our positions on this are really that terribly different. Regrettable behaviour is one thing, being kind of a jerk is another, sexually grabbing someone and refusing to take no for an answer is something else. If someone is in an emotional or altered state (drunk, high, tired, boss was just yelling at them, kid is sick, etc.) then I’m going to be more inclined to be forgiving of them being mean, but less so of criminal behaviour (the judge can factor it into the sentence). The line for responsibility going out the window entirely is being literally unaware of your actions or their consequences.
I’m be totally sympathetic to someone who has a real story about how they weren’t themselves at the time. They’d be able to produce a statement from their doctor saying what medication they were on and what side effects it produced in them. They’d have friends/family/co-workers who would be able to verify that they were acting very strangely. They would be able to come forward confidently knowing that they were not going to have more accusers show up to tell similar stories but at a different point in time.
1 Like
Yeah, we mostly agree I think. I think what I was mostly objecting to was the wisecrack at the end of the article about booze and meds – they are factors, and yes, people can use them as an excuse, but if you’ve ever seen someone have an adverse reaction to either one of these (or struggle with addiction), those people are often suffering too, and we can’t lump that in with the premeditated or “sober” actions of some of these people (like Weinstein).
BTW - out of curiosity, what’s your thinking on Weinstein’s claim that he has sexual addictions? (Setting aside the fact that he ran of treatment as an obvious cover).
Quite a lot of people don’t behave like the kind of assholes they really are because they simply can’t afford it.
Put them in a position of power/money and all bets are off.
1 Like
He said that he didn’t punch him out because the headline would have been: 240-pound BLACK actor punches Hollywood agent. When a black man is the victim people always make it his fault. Sad, but true.
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
