I don’t know, didn’t he stay silent for the same reason the victims stayed silent? It’s the same forces at work… an influential man that could sink acting careers…
If a victim still hasn’t spoke out because of residual fear, we wouldn’t condemn them. If a victim didn’t corroborate another victim because they were still scared, would we blame them?
However his own hypocrisy re Hilarie Burton is another issue; but that wasn’t what McGowan was bringing him to task for.
Twitter has addressed this.
Everything Trump tweets is newsworthy because he’s POTUS. Newsworthiness is one of the factors that is taken into account when a banning is being considered. Trump pretty much is unbannable until he decides to step down as President.
Rose McGowan’s tweets aren’t newsworthy? The Harvey Weinstein story is all over every news outlet in the country. I cannot see how she fails the “newsworthiness” test.
I don’t think that defense would fly. His behavior outside of his link to McGowan only shows him to be part of a pervasive, systemic problem.
The “I didn’t really support the Nazis, but what was I supposed to do” was also a terrible defense for many Germans at the Nuremberg trials.
ETA: Apologies for proving Godwin’s law, but patriarchy (and yes, I believe people in Hollywood have died to cover up scandals).
Nevertheless, she tweeted?
And I’m good with keeping Trump’s account active. I say keep his nutty Twitter rants coming as he becomes more and more unhinged. They may lead to removal via Article 25.
Try not to burn yourself on that hot take, man.
No, victim blaming would be saying she was somehow at fault for getting assaulted. I’m positing that she can’t take a settlement deal agreeing to keep the assault a secret and be a crusader trying to speak out who is being kept silent by the man.
That may have been her only avenue at the time for some semblance of resolution, but not justice. May have been something like “it’s our word against yours so you better settle and go away”. Are you naive to think that Weinstein could not have gone after her and sunk her career? And because she settled does that mean she has to play nice then and forever to stay silent?
Uh, no. You really think there is some sort of rule of honor concerning bribes? A promise obtained by coercion is never binding.
When you think of Twitter, think of Harvey Weinstein, and choose your side. Because Twitter has chosen its side.
'Twas a valiant attempt at character assassination, tho.
Apparently she posted somebody’s private phone number. Her story is certainly newsworthy, but an individuals private phone number really isn’t. I’m not sure Twitter would let Trump get away with that either.
Sure she can. She’s been doing it for a little while now. The McGowan that accepted the settlement offer was young and much more vulnerable. That decision made sense at the time. The McGowan that is speaking out today is stronger and that’s what is right for her to do today. Maybe she’s violating the agreement. Neither of us know and it doesn’t really matter. If Harvey wants to sue her, he sure can try.
That’s Twitter’s official explanation for why he never got banned but it doesn’t really hold up to scrutiny because he sent out a lot of abusive Tweets when he was just a racist reality TV show host and nothing happened to him then either.
“He’s going to be an asshole with a gigantic megaphone anyway, so we might as well just let him be an asshole on our platform
where we can make a buck off of it” is a look that I’m desperately hoping will not age well.
Did he ever post somebody’s private phone number? Do you think Twitter would ignore that as well? I’m guessing that might cross the line, even for Trump.