Let's simplify this debate to some extent... What is now considered "sexual harrassment" decades ago was not recognized by society at the time and one expected to put up with certain behaviors, learn how to keep them under control, and, if not, move on to better work environments--this was true for women and men. I think it is terrific that sexual harrassment is being taken more seriously than when I was young but I also am skeptical when every tom, dick, and nancy jump on the litigation and accusation boat decades later. I was grabbed, groped, and felt up by guys (including a couple of family members) since I was 12. Do I have PTSD? No. There is no excuse for sexual harrassment, but neither is it cause for a public witch hunt.

Meanwhile in the UK...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news...s-41870120

purplethunder3121 said:

CherryMoon57 said:

purplefam99 said:

purplethunder3121 said:

Let's simplify this debate to some extent... What is now considered "sexual harrassment" decades ago was not recognized by society at the time and one expected to put up with certain behaviors, learn how to keep them under control, and, if not, move on to better work environments--this was true for women and men. I think it is terrific that sexual harrassment is being taken more seriously than when I was young but I also am skeptical when every tom, dick, and nancy jump on the litigation and accusation boat decades later. I was grabbed, groped, and felt up by guys (including a couple of family members) since I was 12. Do I have PTSD? No. There is no excuse for sexual harrassment, but neither is it cause for a public witch hunt.

You are obviously not a vulnerable person, your personal constitution didn’t allow The experience to traumatize you. But not everyone is from that cloth if they Say it has effected them that way, we should in my view allow room for that possibility. I would have allowed more room for KS, had he not said that “ if that happened i was probably drunk”. That seems like an admission to me. Or he at least thought it possible. In anycase I feel no one whatever age deserves that treatment.

Isn't that what I said--no one deserves that kind of treatment; I certainly did not. At any age. I am glad that times have changed and people can take legal action against this kind of thing. But, I don't like huge media and legal sweeps that may make people who don't deserve and aren't guilty of sexual harrassment victims as well. The only thing that is worse than someone who victimizes people is someone is who falsely accused and imprisoned by the legal system. My comment is not about Spacey, but my own experiences...

purplefam99 said:

CherryMoon57 said:

purplethunder3121 said:

purplefam99 said:

purplethunder3121 said: You are obviously not a vulnerable person, your personal constitution didn’t allow The experience to traumatize you. But not everyone is from that cloth if they Say it has effected them that way, we should in my view allow room for that possibility. I would have allowed more room for KS, had he not said that “ if that happened i was probably drunk”. That seems like an admission to me. Or he at least thought it possible. In anycase I feel no one whatever age deserves that treatment.

Isn't that what I said--no one deserves that kind of treatment; I certainly did not. At any age. I am glad that times have changed and people can take legal action against this kind of thing. But, I don't like huge media and legal sweeps that may make people who don't deserve and aren't guilty of sexual harrassment victims as well. The only thing that is worse than someone who victimizes people is someone is who falsely accused and imprisoned by the legal system. My comment is not about Spacey, but my own experiences...

This was my point and push from the start of this.

.

Do you rememember in the 80s when parents across the country were being accused of sexual and physical abuse by children and all of it was false? That was scary... The Salem witch trials all over again. People just don't get it, they think if someone especially a child says it, it must be true.

.

.

SupperFurryAnimal? Do you remember these 1980s Satanic ritual abuse allegations? They even tried to implicate celebrities. And you have(ex Public Enemy)Proffesor Griff who preaches about Sex ritual illimunati conspiracy in Hollywood, but he only focus on people of African-American descent who gained fame and that Quincy Jones is one of the big ringleaders behind it. And he has a large enough following to tell me Americans have a problem.

More NWO satanic fall out in Hollywood. More will soon fall.

[Edited 11/5/17 5:11am]

Some American member here might be too young to remember this. But I remember it clearly.

.

.

.

The McMartin preschool trial was a day care sexual abuse case in the 1980s, prosecuted by the Los Angeles District Attorney Ira Reiner. Members of the McMartin family, who operated a preschool in Manhattan Beach, California, were charged with numerous acts of sexual abuse of children in their care. Accusations were made in 1983. Arrests and the pretrial investigation ran from 1984 to 1987, and the trial ran from 1987 to 1990. After six years of criminal trials, no convictions were obtained, and all charges were dropped in 1990. When the trial ended in 1990, it had been the longest and most expensive criminal trial in American history.[1] The case was part of day-care sex-abuse hysteria, a moral panic over alleged Satanic ritual abuse in the 1980s and early 1990s.

.

.

In 1983, Judy Johnson, mother of one of the Manhattan Beach, California, preschool's young students, reported to the police that her son had been sodomized by her estranged husband and by McMartin teacher Ray Buckey.[2][3] Ray Buckey was the grandson of school founder Virginia McMartin and son of administrator Peggy McMartin Buckey. Johnson's belief that her son had been abused began when her son had painful bowel movements. What happened next is still disputed. Some sources state that at that time, Johnson's son denied her suggestion that his preschool teachers had molested him, whereas others say he confirmed the abuse.[2][4]

In addition, Johnson also made several more accusations, including that people at the daycare had sexual encounters with animals, that "Peggy drilled a child under the arms" and "Ray flew in the air."[1][5] Ray Buckey was questioned, but was not prosecuted due to lack of evidence. The police then sent a form letter to about 200 parents of students at the McMartin school, stating that their children might have been abused, and asking the parents to question their children. The text of the letter read:[2]

September 8, 1983. Dear Parent: This Department is conducting a criminal investigation involving child molestation (288 P.C.) Ray Buckey, an employee of Virginia McMartin's Pre-School, was arrested September 7, 1983 by this Department. The following procedure is obviously an unpleasant one, but to protect the rights of your children as well as the rights of the accused, this inquiry is necessary for a complete investigation. Records indicate that your child has been or is currently a student at the pre-school. We are asking your assistance in this continuing investigation. Please question your child to see if he or she has been a witness to any crime or if he or she has been a victim. Our investigation indicates that possible criminal acts include: oral sex, fondling of genitals, buttock or chest area, and sodomy, possibly committed under the pretense of "taking the child's temperature." Also photos may have been taken of children without their clothing. Any information from your child regarding having ever observed Ray Buckey to leave a classroom alone with a child during any nap period, or if they have ever observed Ray Buckey tie up a child, is important. Please complete the enclosed information form and return it to this Department in the enclosed stamped return envelope as soon as possible. We will contact you if circumstances dictate same. We ask you to please keep this investigation strictly confidential because of the nature of the charges and the highly emotional effect it could have on our community. Please do not discuss this investigation with anyone outside your immediate family. Do not contact or discuss the investigation with Raymond Buckey, any member of the accused defendant's family, or employees connected with the McMartin Pre-School

.

.

On March 22, 1984, Virginia McMartin, Peggy McMartin Buckey, Ray Buckey, Ray's sister Peggy Ann Buckey and teachers Mary Ann Jackson, Betty Raidor, and Babette Spitler were charged with 115 counts of child abuse, later expanded to 321 counts of child abuse involving 48 children

.

.

In 1990, after three years of testimony and nine weeks of deliberation by the jury, Peggy McMartin Buckey was acquitted on all counts.[9] Ray Buckey was cleared on 52 of 65 counts, and freed on bail after more than five years in jail. Nine of 11 jurors at a press conference following the trial stated that they believed the children had been molested but the evidence did not allow them to state who had committed the abuse beyond a reasonable doubt.[28] Eleven out of the thirteen jurors who remained by the end of the trial voted to acquit Buckey of the charges; the refusal of the remaining two to vote for a not guilty verdict resulted in the deadlock. The media overwhelmingly focused on the two jurors who voted guilty at the expense of those who believed Buckey was not guilty.[29] Buckey was retried later on six of the 13 counts, which produced another hung jury. The prosecution then gave up trying to obtain a conviction, and the case was closed with all charges against Ray Buckey dismissed. He had been jailed for five years without ever being convicted of any wrongdoing

.

The media coverage was generally skewed towards an uncritical acceptance of the prosecution's viewpoint.[4]David Shaw of the Los Angeles Times wrote a series of articles, which later won the Pulitzer Prize, discussing the flawed and skewed coverage presented by his own paper on the trial.[31] It was only after the trial that coverage of the flaws in the evidence and events presented by witnesses and the prosecution were discussed.[4]

Wayne Satz, at the time a reporter for the Los Angeles ABC affiliate television station KABC, reported on the case and the children's allegations. He presented an unchallenged view of the children's and parents' claims.[32] Satz later entered into a romantic relationship with Kee MacFarlane, the social worker at the Children's Institute International, who was interviewing the children.[32] Another instance of media conflict of interest occurred when David Rosenzweig, the editor at the Los Angeles Times overseeing the coverage, became engaged to marry Lael Rubin, the prosecutor

.

.

The trial lasted seven years and cost $15 million,[33] the longest and most expensive criminal case in the history of the United States legal system, and ultimately resulted in no convictions.[1][3][21] The McMartin preschool was closed and the building was dismantled; several of the accused have since died. In 2005, one of the children (as an adult) retracted the allegations of abuse.[16][34]

Never did anyone do anything to me, and I never saw them doing anything. I said a lot of things that didn't happen. I lied. … Anytime I would give them an answer that they didn't like, they would ask again and encourage me to give them the answer they were looking for. … I felt uncomfortable and a little ashamed that I was being dishonest. But at the same time, being the type of person I was, whatever my parents wanted me to do, I would do

.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMartin_preschool_trial

[Edited 11/5/17 5:15am]

Day-care sex-abuse hysteria was a moral panic that occurred primarily in the 1980s and early 1990s featuring charges against day-care providers of several forms of child abuse, including Satanic ritual abuse.^[1][2] A prominent case in Kern County, California first brought the issue of day-care sexual abuse to the forefront of the public awareness, and the issue figured prominently in news coverage for almost a decade. The Kern County case was followed by cases elsewhere in the United States as well as Canada, New Zealand, Brazil, and various European countries.

In the late 1970s and early 1980s, more and more mothers were working outside of the home, resulting in the opening of large numbers of day-care centers. Anxiety and guilt over leaving young children with strangers may have created a climate of fear and readiness to believe false accusations

Timeline

• 1982 – Kern county child abuse case
• 1983 – McMartin preschool trial in California
• 1984 – Fells Acres Day Care Center
• 1984 – Bernard F. Baran, Jr., convicted January 30, 1985.
• 1985 – Bronx Five case
• 1985 – Wee Care Nursery School in New Jersey in April
• 1987 – Cleveland child abuse scandal in England
• 1987 – Friedman cases begin
• 1989 – Glendale Montessori sexual abuse case in Stuart, Florida
• 1989 – Little Rascals Day Care Center scandal in Edenton, North Carolina
• 1990 – All charges dropped in McMartin preschool trial
• 1991 - Dan and Fran Keller, Fran's Daycare Center, Oak Hill, Texas
• 1991 – Christchurch Civic Creche, New Zealand, involving Peter Hugh McGregor Ellis
• 1992 - Kaare Sortland is killed after being found not guilty of child abuse
• 1992 – Martensville Scandal, Martensville, Saskatchewan, Canada
• 1994 – Wenatchee Sex Rings case
• 1996 – Convictions in the Kern county child abuse case overturned
• 2013 - Dan and Fran Keller released from prison, four years before being ruled innocent of the charges against them

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-care_sex-abuse_hysteria

I don't remember those OF4S, but back then I was dealing with my own demons. It was probably those stories that caused the juvenile officer to not believe me, because my story was just too much. But it was the truth and I had validation later in life when I had cousins come forward and tell me of their own experiences at the hands of those that abused me. They never told because they were afraid no one would believe them, or that it would be blamed on them. Then they saw what I went through, being blamed by the family, having rumors made up about me, rumors they believed as well, until I provided them with evidence to the contrary of those rumors, being ostracized.

I would rather believe a child that makes allegations, have it investigated, than not believe a child. A child that has been abused, that is believed and has the situation investigated, and is given support throughout has a greater positive outcome, than someone that is not believed. When I wasn't believed, even though I knew the truth of the matter, my self-blame, my guilt, my shame intensified. I gave up. It didn't matter any more what happened to me, because no one else cared, why should I? I withdrew completely from the people around me, I hid my emotions completely.

And there are certain words, the way these accusors have worded things, the way they have described things, that I know they are speaking the truth. Certain feelings, certain thought processes, that you wouldn't know if you hadn't gone through it. There have been some actors/actresses come forward over the years with other stars that I thought, "Bullisht!" But this situation, I believe.

benni said:

I don't remember those OF4S, but back then I was dealing with my own demons. It was probably those stories that caused the juvenile officer to not believe me, because my story was just too much. But it was the truth and I had validation later in life when I had cousins come forward and tell me of their own experiences at the hands of those that abused me. They never told because they were afraid no one would believe them, or that it would be blamed on them. Then they saw what I went through, being blamed by the family, having rumors made up about me, rumors they believed as well, until I provided them with evidence to the contrary of those rumors, being ostracized.

I would rather believe a child that makes allegations, have it investigated, than not believe a child. A child that has been abused, that is believed and has the situation investigated, and is given support throughout has a greater positive outcome, than someone that is not believed. When I wasn't believed, even though I knew the truth of the matter, my self-blame, my guilt, my shame intensified. I gave up. It didn't matter any more what happened to me, because no one else cared, why should I? I withdrew completely from the people around me, I hid my emotions completely.

And there are certain words, the way these accusors have worded things, the way they have described things, that I know they are speaking the truth. Certain feelings, certain thought processes, that you wouldn't know if you hadn't gone through it. There have been some actors/actresses come forward over the years with other stars that I thought, "Bullisht!" But this situation, I believe.

Omg it was terrible, I remember listening to parents talking about this stuff then and they were affraid of this happening to them. It was happening everywhere. And a lot of these were also adults retelling tales of abuse that happened when they were children.

.

I agree, that the allegations should always be taken seriously and looked into. If we are going to judge and condemn cases people and lives, we have to be careful on all ends. People react emotionally and then it spreads like wildfire that someone is a child molestor, or in other cases it quietly spreads to disbelieve the accuser/victim. The part that is bad and wrong is the 'guilty until proven innocent' part that always happens. Like in the first case it went on for 7yrs and they were jailed, the man was in jail for 5 yrs. And word is always put out on inmates who abuse children so the inmates can make their life hell. So this innocent man was probably victimized and sexually/physically/mentally assaulted the whole time he was in jail. Not to mention the other women.

.

The way this stuff is handled has to be done differently. Because we have too many examples of false allegations and the accused being judged by the public harshly. like in these 1980/90 cases mass hysteria takes hold and a lynchmob mentality takes over. People take on a vigilante stance.

[Edited 11/5/17 6:51am]

[Edited 11/5/17 7:13am]

I used Salem Witch trials as an example and was mocked for it, but that is an example of how we have not changed much. If you look into how many innocent people were lynched and jailed on the word on those girls. Those girls who manipulated a whole town and judicial system and extracted their revenge in such a calculated way. If you are not familiar with it, you should look into it. They were so wicked they even had a lady's baby acccused of being a which familiar and cuffs and chains were made for a baby who was put in a prison cell.

.

.

.

The most common narrative about organized abuse goes something like this: In the 1980s, unprecedented media coverage of child sexual abuse generated a “moral panic” in which the general public became deeply anxious about child sexual abuse (Jenkins, 1992). This was a milieu comparable to the Salem witch-hunts or McCarthysim, in which even the most outrageous allegations of abuse were considered credible (Victor, 1993). Feminists entered into “ideologically and politically friendly relationships” with religious conservatives expounding “satanic conspiracy theories,” leading to confusion between sexual abuse and imaginary satanic rituals (Nathan, 1991, p. 81). “Satanic ritual abuse” conspiracies abounded in which adults supposedly met in secret groups, abusing and murdering children during satanic rituals. By the mid-1990s, the lives of “thousands” of people had been destroyed by such allegations (Nathan & Snedeker, 1996, p. 3). Children were taken from their parents at the slightest suspicion of abuse, and adults were charged with sex offenses on the flimsiest of pretenses. The moral panic over ritual abuse faded by the end of the 1990s, however (Jenkins, 2004, p. 185). In its place is a more sober understanding of the suggestibility of children and the prevalence of “false memories” among adults claiming to have been abused as children, particularly when they described organized or ritual types of abuse.

http://criminology.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264079.001.0001/acrefore-9780190264079-e-113

benni said:

I've also been thinking about Trump's statement, "When you're a star, they'll let you do anything." Unfortunately, I don't think this type of thinking is unique to Trump. When you are a star, you are surrounded by adoring fans, yes-men, people who tell you how great you are all of the time. You have some fans that would let you do whatever you wanted, just because you are a star. I think they lose the ability to be able to distinquish between those that say "yes" and those that truly just respect the art and say "no". They begin to expect everyone to just let them do whatever they want to do, because they are a star, and even if someone says "no", well who are they going to tell? No one would believe that person, some no name individual vs. the star of several well-received movies or some popular series, the star believes he/she is infallible, because they are made to believe it. Then when something like this comes out, those in the business aren't shocked, they've been seeing it play out for many years, they've heard the whispers, or they've been a victim of that star themselves. But the general public, who have not heard the whispers backstage about so-and-so A Lister, who have not seen these acts because they don't hob-knob in the same social crowds, are shocked, refuse to believe it, or think it's a witch hunt. When the in-crowd are whispering to each other, "I can't believe someone finally came forward about it."

This is an important post.

I think there may need to be an extreme boundary placed between the 'celebrities' and those that work for/with them as well as fans. For everyones sake. A Listers are definately in a different culture.

I remember that, it was a huge, huge ordeal.

OldFriends4Sale said:

Some American member here might be too young to remember this. But I remember it clearly.

.

.

.

The McMartin preschool trial was a day care sexual abuse case in the 1980s, prosecuted by the Los Angeles District Attorney Ira Reiner. Members of the McMartin family, who operated a preschool in Manhattan Beach, California, were charged with numerous acts of sexual abuse of children in their care. Accusations were made in 1983. Arrests and the pretrial investigation ran from 1984 to 1987, and the trial ran from 1987 to 1990. After six years of criminal trials, no convictions were obtained, and all charges were dropped in 1990. When the trial ended in 1990, it had been the longest and most expensive criminal trial in American history.[1] The case was part of day-care sex-abuse hysteria, a moral panic over alleged Satanic ritual abuse in the 1980s and early 1990s.

.

.

In 1983, Judy Johnson, mother of one of the Manhattan Beach, California, preschool's young students, reported to the police that her son had been sodomized by her estranged husband and by McMartin teacher Ray Buckey.[2][3] Ray Buckey was the grandson of school founder Virginia McMartin and son of administrator Peggy McMartin Buckey. Johnson's belief that her son had been abused began when her son had painful bowel movements. What happened next is still disputed. Some sources state that at that time, Johnson's son denied her suggestion that his preschool teachers had molested him, whereas others say he confirmed the abuse.[2][4]

In addition, Johnson also made several more accusations, including that people at the daycare had sexual encounters with animals, that "Peggy drilled a child under the arms" and "Ray flew in the air."[1][5] Ray Buckey was questioned, but was not prosecuted due to lack of evidence. The police then sent a form letter to about 200 parents of students at the McMartin school, stating that their children might have been abused, and asking the parents to question their children. The text of the letter read:[2]

September 8, 1983. Dear Parent: This Department is conducting a criminal investigation involving child molestation (288 P.C.) Ray Buckey, an employee of Virginia McMartin's Pre-School, was arrested September 7, 1983 by this Department. The following procedure is obviously an unpleasant one, but to protect the rights of your children as well as the rights of the accused, this inquiry is necessary for a complete investigation. Records indicate that your child has been or is currently a student at the pre-school. We are asking your assistance in this continuing investigation. Please question your child to see if he or she has been a witness to any crime or if he or she has been a victim. Our investigation indicates that possible criminal acts include: oral sex, fondling of genitals, buttock or chest area, and sodomy, possibly committed under the pretense of "taking the child's temperature." Also photos may have been taken of children without their clothing. Any information from your child regarding having ever observed Ray Buckey to leave a classroom alone with a child during any nap period, or if they have ever observed Ray Buckey tie up a child, is important. Please complete the enclosed information form and return it to this Department in the enclosed stamped return envelope as soon as possible. We will contact you if circumstances dictate same. We ask you to please keep this investigation strictly confidential because of the nature of the charges and the highly emotional effect it could have on our community. Please do not discuss this investigation with anyone outside your immediate family. Do not contact or discuss the investigation with Raymond Buckey, any member of the accused defendant's family, or employees connected with the McMartin Pre-School

.

.

On March 22, 1984, Virginia McMartin, Peggy McMartin Buckey, Ray Buckey, Ray's sister Peggy Ann Buckey and teachers Mary Ann Jackson, Betty Raidor, and Babette Spitler were charged with 115 counts of child abuse, later expanded to 321 counts of child abuse involving 48 children

.

.

In 1990, after three years of testimony and nine weeks of deliberation by the jury, Peggy McMartin Buckey was acquitted on all counts.[9] Ray Buckey was cleared on 52 of 65 counts, and freed on bail after more than five years in jail. Nine of 11 jurors at a press conference following the trial stated that they believed the children had been molested but the evidence did not allow them to state who had committed the abuse beyond a reasonable doubt.[28] Eleven out of the thirteen jurors who remained by the end of the trial voted to acquit Buckey of the charges; the refusal of the remaining two to vote for a not guilty verdict resulted in the deadlock. The media overwhelmingly focused on the two jurors who voted guilty at the expense of those who believed Buckey was not guilty.[29] Buckey was retried later on six of the 13 counts, which produced another hung jury. The prosecution then gave up trying to obtain a conviction, and the case was closed with all charges against Ray Buckey dismissed. He had been jailed for five years without ever being convicted of any wrongdoing

.

The media coverage was generally skewed towards an uncritical acceptance of the prosecution's viewpoint.[4]David Shaw of the Los Angeles Times wrote a series of articles, which later won the Pulitzer Prize, discussing the flawed and skewed coverage presented by his own paper on the trial.[31] It was only after the trial that coverage of the flaws in the evidence and events presented by witnesses and the prosecution were discussed.[4]

Wayne Satz, at the time a reporter for the Los Angeles ABC affiliate television station KABC, reported on the case and the children's allegations. He presented an unchallenged view of the children's and parents' claims.[32] Satz later entered into a romantic relationship with Kee MacFarlane, the social worker at the Children's Institute International, who was interviewing the children.[32] Another instance of media conflict of interest occurred when David Rosenzweig, the editor at the Los Angeles Times overseeing the coverage, became engaged to marry Lael Rubin, the prosecutor

.

.

The trial lasted seven years and cost $15 million,[33] the longest and most expensive criminal case in the history of the United States legal system, and ultimately resulted in no convictions.[1][3][21] The McMartin preschool was closed and the building was dismantled; several of the accused have since died. In 2005, one of the children (as an adult) retracted the allegations of abuse.[16][34]

Never did anyone do anything to me, and I never saw them doing anything. I said a lot of things that didn't happen. I lied. … Anytime I would give them an answer that they didn't like, they would ask again and encourage me to give them the answer they were looking for. … I felt uncomfortable and a little ashamed that I was being dishonest. But at the same time, being the type of person I was, whatever my parents wanted me to do, I would do

.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMartin_preschool_trial

[Edited 11/5/17 5:15am]

OldFriends4Sale said:

poppys said:

I left because you were dominating the thread with one on one personal attacks, on myself and others, which have nothing to do with the topic. I returned when a few more voices chimed in. Soon the thread will be smothered completely if prior experience is an indicator.

This thread is so different from the Weinstein thread in P&R. Makes me think boys have a harder time being treated fairly in sexual misconduct cases than girls - which is pretty astounding. One place where men do not look out for their own.

I suspect if I was just a member 'dominating' would not have been a word of choice.

Just because certain topics are more passionate to some than others doesn't mean anyone is dominating a thread. That is a ludicrous idea. Laurarichardson will post the most in some Estate threads, not because she is dominating it, but because she is more passionate about the topic.
We all come from varying backgrounds and experiences.

.

I made no personal attacks. You started it in post 106:I've read your many posts and do not share your opinions.

so clearly there is problem on your end, so just stop replying to me directly or indirectly.

I've moved on from this. You said candle snuffed, I'm out. Let's stay out.

I do not have to share your opinions, Old Friends. That doesn't mean I started it or that there is a problem on my end. I am absolutely fine with not replying to you on the thread, but I will comment as I see things, directly or indirectly. How is this a discussion forum if one person decides who can respond and how? The balance of power is way off here.

poppys said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

I suspect if I was just a member 'dominating' would not have been a word of choice.

Just because certain topics are more passionate to some than others doesn't mean anyone is dominating a thread. That is a ludicrous idea. Laurarichardson will post the most in some Estate threads, not because she is dominating it, but because she is more passionate about the topic.
We all come from varying backgrounds and experiences.

.

I made no personal attacks. You started it in post 106:I've read your many posts and do not share your opinions.

so clearly there is problem on your end, so just stop replying to me directly or indirectly.

I've moved on from this. You said candle snuffed, I'm out. Let's stay out.

I do not have to share your opinions, Old Friends. That doesn't mean I started it or that there is a problem on my end. I am absolutely fine with not replying to you on the thread, but I will comment as I see things, directly or indirectly. How is this a discussion forum if one person decides who can respond and how? The balance of power is way off here.

oh my god it's Sunday and I have 1 hour back from daylight savings.

it has nothing to do with balance of power. you reply with prejudice and then don't understand why you are having an issue?
You got personal and said:I've read your many posts and do not share your opinions.
so why would U want to continue to debate with me when it was YOU who made the decisision to tip the balance. You did.

I don't care, there are other people you can reply and debate with here

reply or don't but why? once it clicked that :I've read your many posts and do not share your opinions.

then I'm ok and done

move on I've moved on

peace out

poppys said: "...candle snuffed, I'm out"

[Edited 11/5/17 8:00am]

[Edited 11/5/17 8:19am]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/news/richard-dreyfuss-son-claims-kevin-spacey-groped-him-while-his-father-was-in-the-room/ar-AAurLZS?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp

Richard Dreyfuss' Son Claims Kevin Spacey Groped Him While His Father Was in the Room

Dreyfuss claims the incident took place in 2008, when Spacey was directing his father Richard Dreyfuss in the play Complicit at London's Old Vic theater. He was 18 years old at the time.

"It happened one night when the three of us were alone in Kevin's apartment rehearsing my father's lines. My father didn't see, and I didn't tell him about the incident for many years," he said. "Instead, I spent the next nine years telling people the story at parties for laughs. ...

He added, "Kevin Spacey is a sexual predator. But I still never thought talking about it seriously was ever an option."

Dreyfuss wrote that as a shy teenager, he admired Spacey and mistook some of his advances as friendly behavior. Dreyfuss only became suspicious of Spacey when he sat down next to him and placed his hand on his thigh as the three of them went over the script.

"It took that long because it just never occurred to me that Kevin would be interested in me in the first place. He was an adult man, a hero of mine, my dad's boss, none of which were categories on my radar for sexual interactions," the actor said. "Besides, I thought, Surely he can't be coming on to me like this right in front of my dad. But his hand stayed there."

Dreyfuss made several attempts to move to a different seat and get away from Spacey, but the House of Cards star relentlessly followed him and slid his hand onto Dreyfuss' thigh.

"I was unable to process what was happening: My dad and I were pretending to be lovers in a play while Kevin Spacey was trying to seduce me and all the while in real life I was a hapless, straight virgin who just wanted to become a famous actor," he wrote. "I didn't think there was anything I could do short of alerting my dad to what was happening. But I didn't want to start a feud between them. I didn't want the play to be threatened."

OldFriends4Sale said:

poppys said:

I do not have to share your opinions, Old Friends. That doesn't mean I started it or that there is a problem on my end. I am absolutely fine with not replying to you on the thread, but I will comment as I see things, directly or indirectly. How is this a discussion forum if one person decides who can respond and how? The balance of power is way off here.

oh my god it's Sunday and I have 1 hour back from daylight savings.

it has nothing to do with balance of power. you reply with prejudice and then don't understand why you are having an issue?
You got personal and said:I've read your many posts and do not share your opinions.
so why would U want to continue to debate with me when it was YOU who made the decisision to tip the balance. You did.

I don't care, there are other people you can reply and debate with here

reply or don't but why? once it clicked that :I've read your many posts and do not share your opinions.

then I'm ok and done

move on I've moved on

peace out

poppys said: "...candle snuffed, I'm out"

Nice photo of a lit candle. The problem is why do I have to agree with you or be wrong? Clearly you have posted more on this thread than anyone else. I left and came back, and I said why. There are other orgers here too.

Dang, Spacey has problems keeping his hands off people.

OldFriends4Sale said:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/news/richard-dreyfuss-son-claims-kevin-spacey-groped-him-while-his-father-was-in-the-room/ar-AAurLZS?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp

Richard Dreyfuss' Son Claims Kevin Spacey Groped Him While His Father Was in the Room

Dreyfuss claims the incident took place in 2008, when Spacey was directing his father Richard Dreyfuss in the play Complicit at London's Old Vic theater. He was 18 years old at the time.

"It happened one night when the three of us were alone in Kevin's apartment rehearsing my father's lines. My father didn't see, and I didn't tell him about the incident for many years," he said. "Instead, I spent the next nine years telling people the story at parties for laughs. ...

He added, "Kevin Spacey is a sexual predator. But I still never thought talking about it seriously was ever an option."

Dreyfuss wrote that as a shy teenager, he admired Spacey and mistook some of his advances as friendly behavior. Dreyfuss only became suspicious of Spacey when he sat down next to him and placed his hand on his thigh as the three of them went over the script.

"It took that long because it just never occurred to me that Kevin would be interested in me in the first place. He was an adult man, a hero of mine, my dad's boss, none of which were categories on my radar for sexual interactions," the actor said. "Besides, I thought, Surely he can't be coming on to me like this right in front of my dad. But his hand stayed there."

Dreyfuss made several attempts to move to a different seat and get away from Spacey, but the House of Cards star relentlessly followed him and slid his hand onto Dreyfuss' thigh.

"I was unable to process what was happening: My dad and I were pretending to be lovers in a play while Kevin Spacey was trying to seduce me and all the while in real life I was a hapless, straight virgin who just wanted to become a famous actor," he wrote. "I didn't think there was anything I could do short of alerting my dad to what was happening. But I didn't want to start a feud between them. I didn't want the play to be threatened."

PennyPurple said:

Dang, Spacey has problems keeping his hands off people.

OldFriends4Sale said:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/news/richard-dreyfuss-son-claims-kevin-spacey-groped-him-while-his-father-was-in-the-room/ar-AAurLZS?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp

Richard Dreyfuss' Son Claims Kevin Spacey Groped Him While His Father Was in the Room

Dreyfuss claims the incident took place in 2008, when Spacey was directing his father Richard Dreyfuss in the play Complicit at London's Old Vic theater. He was 18 years old at the time.

"It happened one night when the three of us were alone in Kevin's apartment rehearsing my father's lines. My father didn't see, and I didn't tell him about the incident for many years," he said. "Instead, I spent the next nine years telling people the story at parties for laughs. ...

He added, "Kevin Spacey is a sexual predator. But I still never thought talking about it seriously was ever an option."

Dreyfuss wrote that as a shy teenager, he admired Spacey and mistook some of his advances as friendly behavior. Dreyfuss only became suspicious of Spacey when he sat down next to him and placed his hand on his thigh as the three of them went over the script.

"It took that long because it just never occurred to me that Kevin would be interested in me in the first place. He was an adult man, a hero of mine, my dad's boss, none of which were categories on my radar for sexual interactions," the actor said. "Besides, I thought, Surely he can't be coming on to me like this right in front of my dad. But his hand stayed there."

Dreyfuss made several attempts to move to a different seat and get away from Spacey, but the House of Cards star relentlessly followed him and slid his hand onto Dreyfuss' thigh.

"I was unable to process what was happening: My dad and I were pretending to be lovers in a play while Kevin Spacey was trying to seduce me and all the while in real life I was a hapless, straight virgin who just wanted to become a famous actor," he wrote. "I didn't think there was anything I could do short of alerting my dad to what was happening. But I didn't want to start a feud between them. I didn't want the play to be threatened."

Now, this sounds like real life...

maplenpg said:

CherryMoon57 said:

Meanwhile in the UK...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news...s-41870120

I think there are many more to go yet, but for me this is about empowering the common man/woman, who are trying to put money in their families pockets, to go about their business without fear of disgusting remarks being made or being asked to do inappropriate things in order to achieve career progression. It's about teenagers being able to go on social media without being pinged pictures of penises or similar. It's about having the ability to travel on the train without people rubbing against you. It's about being able to go to someone bedroom without the automatic thought that this means you are consenting to sex with them. If high profile actors and politicians become the exemplars then so be it, it should entail that future behaviours change, and high profile people should be the exemplars for this change.

I agree. For so long, many people have kept quiet about so many things done to them or others around them by people in a position of trust or power, especially in the show business. It is time to shed a light on it all, hopefully for the better. And yes, I too think this is just the tip of the iceberg.

"One person's freedom ends where another's begins."

well nothing really happened; Spacey didnt rape anybody, he just tried to have sex as we all try once in a while. Even the coming out wasn't misplaced since it paint the picture: most people didnt know him liking boys/man. Without that info, the story would seem rather far-streched. Spacey did us a favor by not denying him trying to get 'something' and explaining it could have been truth since he falls for men. Nothing more to it.

TheFman said:

well nothing really happened; Spacey didnt rape anybody, he just tried to have sex as we all try once in a while. Even the coming out wasn't misplaced since it paint the picture: most people didnt know him liking boys/man. Without that info, the story would seem rather far-streched. Spacey did us a favor by not denying him trying to get 'something' and explaining it could have been truth since he falls for men. Nothing more to it.

TheFman said:

well nothing really happened; Spacey didnt rape anybody, he just tried to have sex as we all try once in a while. Even the coming out wasn't misplaced since it paint the picture: most people didnt know him liking boys/man. Without that info, the story would seem rather far-streched. Spacey did us a favor by not denying him trying to get 'something' and explaining it could have been truth since he falls for men. Nothing more to it.

How do you know he didn't rape anybody? People are still coming forward.

PennyPurple said:

TheFman said:

well nothing really happened; Spacey didnt rape anybody, he just tried to have sex as we all try once in a while. Even the coming out wasn't misplaced since it paint the picture: most people didnt know him liking boys/man. Without that info, the story would seem rather far-streched. Spacey did us a favor by not denying him trying to get 'something' and explaining it could have been truth since he falls for men. Nothing more to it.

How do you know he didn't rape anybody? People are still coming forward.

Plus it doesn't have to be a rape for it to be wrong or cause damage to the person.

PennyPurple said:

TheFman said:

well nothing really happened; Spacey didnt rape anybody, he just tried to have sex as we all try once in a while. Even the coming out wasn't misplaced since it paint the picture: most people didnt know him liking boys/man. Without that info, the story would seem rather far-streched. Spacey did us a favor by not denying him trying to get 'something' and explaining it could have been truth since he falls for men. Nothing more to it.

How do you know he didn't rape anybody? People are still coming forward.

I think they are refering to the situation with Anthony

CherryMoon57 said:

PennyPurple said:

How do you know he didn't rape anybody? People are still coming forward.

Plus it doesn't have to be a rape for it to be wrong or cause damage to the person.

Do you really think that guy Anthony is damaged because of that? oh please, such drama just because an advance.