skip to main |
skip to sidebar
From
The Weekly Standard:
Hollywood is full of connoisseurs like Weinstein, men whose erotic
imaginations are fueled primarily by humiliation, who glut their
sensibilities with the most exquisite refinements of shame. A journalist
once told me about visiting another very famous Hollywood
producer—you’d know the name—who exhibited for my friend his collection
of photographs of famous female actresses—you’d know their names,
too—performing sexual acts for his private viewing. As with Weinstein,
this man’s chief thrill was humiliation, and the more famous the target
the more roundly it was savored: Even her, a big star—these people will do anything to land a role; they’re so awful, they’ll even do it for me. (Read more.)
From
Matt Walsh:
We started with the death of Hugh Hefner, an elderly pimp with an
affinity for bathrobes who spent six decades sexually exploiting young,
desperate women. A couple of weeks later we saw the professional death
of Harvey Weinstein, a slightly younger pimp with an affinity for
bathrobes who spent three decades sexually exploiting young, desperate
women. But, as I'm sure you've noticed, the reaction to these two men
has been drastically different.
For just one illustration, take a look at how The Daily Beast
has reported on the physical and professional demise of Hefner and
Weinstein, respectively. They've published many blaring headlines
rightfully calling Weinstein a "predator" whose "reign of terror" left
countless victims in its wake. As for Hefner, they lauded his "civil
rights legacy" and credited him with "bringing sex out of the shadows."
The fact that he "brought sex out of the shadows" by objectifying
thousands of women, while keeping a harem of teenage girls who performed
sexual acts on his elderly, decrepit body because they thought it was
the best way to advance their softcore porn careers, is apparently
irrelevant. (Read more.)
Share
No comments:
Post a Comment