Our Shared Shelf discussion
Miscellaneous
>
“Casting Couch” Statue
date
newest »


https://www.yahoo.com/entertainme..."
My feelings on this can be seen easily in this question:
Do we want statues of John Smith erected somewhere?
That's all I have to say to that.
Those kind of guy (I write guy but, for me, I don't even know how we can call this) deserve absolutely nothing and even less a statue.
These who deserve golden statues are all the strong women who stood against him.
These who deserve golden statues are all the strong women who stood against him.
It's not exactly a flattering piece of art. He looks... frumpy, the Oscar is a wee bit small, Double chin, socks with slippers, etc etc.
To me, this is immortalizing his and the whole industry's shame. Reminding people that this no longer has any power. That this is no longer a dirty secret that's whispered behind closed doors.
It's exposed. And it no longer has power to do anymore harm.
To me, this is immortalizing his and the whole industry's shame. Reminding people that this no longer has any power. That this is no longer a dirty secret that's whispered behind closed doors.
It's exposed. And it no longer has power to do anymore harm.
Lewis wrote: "Those kind of guy (I write guy but, for me, I don't even know how we can call this
And I absolutely, 100% disagree with the statement. We can call him a guy because that is what he is. He identified as male. He identified as human. And we have to understand that. Stop being blind to who he is. Stop writing him off as an aberrant.
It's the same reason why we can take a picture of Hitler with a little girl child walking through a field of flowers.
The minute we dehumanize either of them and place them into a category all of their own is the minute we leave ourselves open for the next monster. The minute we remove them from everyone else is the moment when we forget that we can become just like them.
Harvey, Hitler were both human. The only thing different between them and you and them and me are the choices we made to be where we are. The convictions we have held on. The moralities we uphold.
And I absolutely, 100% disagree with the statement. We can call him a guy because that is what he is. He identified as male. He identified as human. And we have to understand that. Stop being blind to who he is. Stop writing him off as an aberrant.
It's the same reason why we can take a picture of Hitler with a little girl child walking through a field of flowers.
The minute we dehumanize either of them and place them into a category all of their own is the minute we leave ourselves open for the next monster. The minute we remove them from everyone else is the moment when we forget that we can become just like them.
Harvey, Hitler were both human. The only thing different between them and you and them and me are the choices we made to be where we are. The convictions we have held on. The moralities we uphold.
Pam wrote: "Lewis wrote: "Those kind of guy (I write guy but, for me, I don't even know how we can call this
And I absolutely, 100% disagree with the statement. We can call him a guy because that is what he ..."
@Pam, I'm agree that physically speaking it's a human, but can we really call a human with an inhuman behavior a human ? I'm not quite sure.
I think the word I was looking for in my previous post is "monster".
For me, the difference between a human being and a monster is the choices made by a monster don't exist for a human.
And I absolutely, 100% disagree with the statement. We can call him a guy because that is what he ..."
@Pam, I'm agree that physically speaking it's a human, but can we really call a human with an inhuman behavior a human ? I'm not quite sure.
I think the word I was looking for in my previous post is "monster".
For me, the difference between a human being and a monster is the choices made by a monster don't exist for a human.
That's my entire argument, Lewis.
The number one mistake we can make in history is making the assumption that only inhuman monsters are capable of doing terrible things.
Stop dehumanizing Harvey just do you can reassure yourself that "normal" humans aren't capable of doing bad things. Harvey was an artist who gave to charity, supported artistic endeavors, and probably liked puppies. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of his. But the moment we stop giving him human attributes is the moment when we overlook people just like him in real life.
How many times have people done horrible things and yet those closest to them says "they are the nicest person, wouldn't harm a fly"
Bad people, people who do atrocious things don't wear black hats and are mustachioed with evil laughs.
They look just like you and me.
The number one mistake we can make in history is making the assumption that only inhuman monsters are capable of doing terrible things.
Stop dehumanizing Harvey just do you can reassure yourself that "normal" humans aren't capable of doing bad things. Harvey was an artist who gave to charity, supported artistic endeavors, and probably liked puppies. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of his. But the moment we stop giving him human attributes is the moment when we overlook people just like him in real life.
How many times have people done horrible things and yet those closest to them says "they are the nicest person, wouldn't harm a fly"
Bad people, people who do atrocious things don't wear black hats and are mustachioed with evil laughs.
They look just like you and me.

The number one mistake we can make in history is making the assumption that only inhuman monsters are capable of doing terrible things.
Stop dehumanizing Harve..."
Didn't Harvey himself in a way dehumanize the women he assaulted? By assuming he could get away with anything at anytime without recourse to whom ever he felt like demeaning.
Yes I agree, anyone can do terrible things. It is allowing oneself to act upon those terrible things when you know that they are flat out wrong and continuing to do so over and over and over again thinking you are above any and all consequence that is when you go from being human to being inhumane or in other words a monster.
Guys, I completely understand your points.
I don't think you understand mine. But it's just a conversation on symantics so I'll drop it.
I don't think you understand mine. But it's just a conversation on symantics so I'll drop it.

I don't think you understand mine. But it's just a conversation on symantics so I'll drop it."
I guess i'm with you, Pam. I would not call those people monsters, because i too think they are still only humans. Shitty humans who get away with awful things. But still humans.

I don't think you understand mine. But it's just a conversation on symantics so I'll drop it."
I guess i'm with you, Pam. I would not call t..."
And there is the rub there men are not demons not evil in carnet they are just people abhorrent but people who do the things they do because better people don't stop the creation of systems and circumstances that allow them to operate.
We should spend less time demonising these inadequate's and more making a world where we thrive and they don't
The statue was too soon in my view if at all he should be forgotten and his victims remembered

I don't think you understand mine. But it's just a conversation on symantics so I'll drop it."
I guess i'm with you, Pam. I..."
And he should be remembered in the right way, I'm just repeating what I said further above for now.
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/h...
I understand what the artist was attempting to accomplish by creating the statue which was to bring light to sexual misconduct in the entertainment industry.
My question though is this:
By using Weinstein in this depiction is the artist inadvertently paying homage to this man who has hurt so many?
I feel a bit insulted and disgusted by this but maybe that is what the artist wants.
Anyone have any thoughts?