Many victims of

These days when it comes to sex crimes it's popular to ignore a victims own degree of culpability.  Many so called feminists even insist women have the right to partake in every risky behavior imaginable and still act like they bear no part of the blame if they are victimized.  I disagree, if you want to be safe you need to take reasonable precautions.


While I agree that women should not have to endure abuse, the sex game is an integral part of life and it's not hard for women who have absolutely no interest in receiving sexual attention to tremendously reduce their exposure to risk by dressing and behaving appropriately.  That line of thinking is well supported in the greater body of law.


If you have an automotive accident they do consider related factors like speeding and whether or not you had an opportunity to reduce the impact of the accident by taking reasonable actions yourself and did.  Even if someone runs a light you aren't completely innocent if you were texting and didn't brake before the collision, even though you had the right away. 


Every kid I grew up with had a bike lock, even though bike theft is illegal, and we all knew that if we didn't lock our bike and it got stolen, it was at least partially our own fault.


Becoming the victim of sexual abuse and even rape, is usually avoidable if  you take reasonable precautions.  The men who are perpetrators right up to Harvey Weinstein all do what they do to people that they hope will respond in a way they want them to, and they select potential victims that appear to be vulnerable.  They don't waste their time on women who are likely to reject them, they focus on the ones who display outward signs that indicate they may be receptive.  So what is an "outward sign"


The way you dress, yes, if you dress like a slut your more likely to become the target of men who hope you are as loose as your attire suggests, than a woman who dresses modestly.


The places you go, yes, if you agree to meet Harvey in his hotel for a business meeting and then follow him into the bedroom, you're putting yourself much more at risk than if you refuse to meet anywhere that isn't a more traditional business setting.


The way you behave, yes if you give come on looks and use your sexuality to capture the interest of men who have something you want, you greatly increase the chances that you will attract the attention of men who hope you're not just leading them on to get what you want.


Even the jobs you apply for.  There are few people in Hollywood who don't know what it takes for women to make it in acting if they don't already have family or friends in that business.  If selling your body is not your thing, don't look for jobs where that's a known requirement.


And lastly if you don't want to be called a hypocrite, once you realize you're in a place or business that isn't offering legitimate work opportunities, get out of there.  You aren't a victim if you loose a great job that required you submit to sexual abuse, you just fall back to the more legitimate employment positions where you belong.  NO, you weren't cheated out of being a star...  you never were what they were looking for, get over it and move on.   Yes that's not fair, life isn't fair, good people don't always win, and lots of bad people get away with murder, get over it.


Autumn Cote Added Dec 23, 2017 - 4:47pm
Please note, the second best way to draw more attention to your work is to comment on the work of others. I know this to be true because if you do, I'll do everything in my power to draw more attention to your articles (there is a lot I can do and would like to do on your behalf).
Riley Brown Added Dec 23, 2017 - 5:51pm
Autumn, I'm not sure if you comment about increasing comments in this forum is automatically inserted, since I've commented in lots more forums than I've authored, and the comment got added anyway.
I actually prefer it if fewer but more interested people comment because I value their input much more than the input of someone who is only commenting so that they can increase the number of times they comment in other people's forums.
I do wonder if your insistence that people comment in other people's forums is a significant reason why many of the comments I see in many forums are so shallow.  Often its obvious commenters havn't even read the topic, perhaps just the headline.  While that does add volume, I think it diminishes the quality of the forums.
Autumn Cote Added Dec 23, 2017 - 6:15pm
My comment to you was intentionally placed.  After you posted this article, I checked out your profile and noticed you hadn't commented on someone else's article since December 8th.  That's a violation of the rules.   I agree with what you're saying about comment quality, that's why the rules state comments must be insightful.  
Riley Brown Added Dec 23, 2017 - 11:54pm
Autumn,  I tend to jump on WritersBeat when I'm in town.  I was not aware that if I return from a trip I have an obligation to place comments on other people's forums before I author another one of my own. 
When I am inspired I do like to write and must admit I don't first jump into other forums to rack up points.  I guess I need to treat WB more like a video game and make sure I do what is needed to acquire the points you require.  That would be easier to keep track of if I wasn't participating in other open forum.  I can't always remember which forum I participated in last. 
I just looked for your official rules and can't find them.  Where do you have the ratio or quotas posted? 
Have you ever considered putting some sort of meter on people's home page that shows where they are with regard to the required ratio?  That could remind them before they go critical.
Autumn Cote Added Dec 24, 2017 - 4:20am
Perhaps if Writer Beat grows I will need to install a point system to enforce/encourage authors to follow the rules.  However, it’s small enough now that I easily can self-administer all of our stated rules.  I wouldn’t look at commenting on the work of others as an obligation.  It’s fun and it’s the best way to promote your articles.  Our policies/rules can be seen at the bottom of this page in the link labeled “policies.”
Benjamin Goldstein Added Dec 24, 2017 - 5:56am
I'm not very insightful here, but I love your provocative articles, Riley. Merry Christmas!
Benjamin Goldstein Added Dec 24, 2017 - 6:38am
I add some meat so the conversation is not drowned in the comment activity claptrap.
The onus of guilt must be placed on the assaultant, yet we must strike a balance. A large streak of feminism does indeed place the onus on the women. That's why we have all these ugly feminists. They just hide it under phrases like 'objectification'. They will only turn around when it actually comes to a rape case. Then the victim must be lifted up and all guilt must be denied.
With the Islamification the discussion comes back with force. Muslims come from failed states where the responsibility is on the woman. The perpetrator is hard to catch and to punish. Result: Ugly and unfree women.
If we want our women to be hotter and freer, we must ensure swift punishment. In Europe penalty codes are very lax, but the native males have been domesticised enough already by previous stricter codes to have the result we need. It takes some generations of punishing the wrongdoers to get this effect. It is undone with mass immigration.
It is questionable - considering the response time of the police - that our court system does enough to ensure that women can be as sexy as they wish to be. As a society we must make sure that those who defend women under attack are not given too harsh punishments for their violent behavior towards an attacker. If we want hot women in public, we cannot be wussies decrying all violence. The onus of guilt should be on the perpetrator. Man who want eye candy have to literally fight for it. I think that any real man understands that.
Dino Manalis Added Dec 24, 2017 - 8:00am
Men and women should have mutual respect, because opposites attract and men have to be gentlemen and romantic.  Sex requires personal responsibility and parents and schools need to do a much better job at teaching sex education, it's not just a matter of personal satisfaction, you have  to satisfy your prospective sex partner.  If she says no, that's the end of it!  Don't harass her or abuse her!
Bill Caciene Added Dec 24, 2017 - 11:09am
I say bullshit. As I believe you already know, a victim has no degree of culpability. Accordingly, this article is a farce, you want to see how many people agree with a position you find totally offensive.
Riley Brown Added Dec 24, 2017 - 12:07pm
Benjamin, the latest round of sexual abuse has not been over rape but rather disgusting displays and overt quid pro quo demands from men in industries where sex is common commodity. 
This is all about the current situation in the US where men did disgusting things that in the past the police would not have taken action over even if the women had reported them at that time.
Harvey appears to have only considered hiring attractive women who AGREED to have sex with him and he wasn't alone.  The casting couch was the only way most women without connections stood any chance of breaking into Hollywood, and it went on for years.
My forum deals with the fact that none of the women who had sex with Harvey said NO when they had the chance, so I say they all bear some responsibility for the fact that they rose to fame by spreading their legs.  Harvey and all those like him are disgusting scum, but the women he USED all had an opportunity to walk away and chose not to, not to unlike prostitutes who say OK, when the price is right.
Riley Brown Added Dec 24, 2017 - 12:23pm
Bill, along the same line, if your child forgot to lock their bicycle up and it was stolen, would you tell them the theft was not partially their responsibility?  In my opinion responsible people go out of their way to avoid obvious risks.
Ok so now your daughter wants to be a star and tells you Harvey has invited her to a cheep hotel room to discuss her possibilities.  Hmm, you're not stupid, you know it's Hollywood and that sleazy situation will probably result demands for sex, do you advise her to go there anyway?  Do you suggest once there she follow him into the bedroom? 
OK, she really wants to be a star, so she agrees to have sex with him, do you still say her willingness to say YES to outrageous and even illegal demands was not partially to blame for the fact that she was abused?
All the women I'm talking about not only tolerated the abuse, they willingly traded it for access to jobs they couldn't have gotten any other way.  I think they are actually guilty of perpetuating that type of abuse because they made that type of abusive behavior a successful ploy to get sex.  If all the women had just walked out, and especially if they had reported the abuse instead of saying yes and moving on, those men would have had to look for other ways to get their rocks off, and perhaps also not been allowed to keep their jobs.  They only kept doing it because lose women kept saying OK.
In my humble opinion none of these victims is as deserving of my sympathy as they would be if they were out jogging and someone jumped out of the bushes and raped them at knife point.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Dec 24, 2017 - 12:28pm
Riley, I thought you had the Hollywood slut thread already. I understood your article much more broadly. It even mentions rape. Let's see if people chime in who have the intellectual weight to grabble with the larger idea of the responsibility of the victim and how much precaution we want people to take. There is also the question of what kind of precaution we want. I would rather see the ladies carry a gun than to hide under too much clothes. And there is the question of how to instill a moral so women can dress riské. I think men would have to address an offender before it gets uncomfortable for the woman. Swift punishments are the way a society sets its morals. Of course, it comes with the caveat that guys have to deescalate every step on the way while dealing with a wrongdoer. Nobody wants a knife in the abdomen. Understanding wrongdoing is embarrassment and punishment enough for the lesser offenders.
Tamara Wilhite Added Dec 24, 2017 - 4:46pm
Thank you for the balanced discussion on this.
David Montaigne Added Dec 24, 2017 - 6:40pm
Riley, you bring balance to a hot topic in which the popular culture of victimhood has undermined the concept of taking precautions.  Obviously a rapist is always wrong and they should be blamed and punished.  But your point is that risks can be minimized by potential victims.  Don't walk through bad neighborhoods alone flashing a handful of cash late at night and you'll be less likely to get mugged.  The same could be argued for rape; don't flaunt the goods provocatively in risky settings and assume no fault for increasing the risk.  Everyone has the right to do it, and if attacked it is still clear who is victim and who is criminal - but just because we have the legal right to risky behavior doesn't mean it is wise or risk free to do so.
Riley Brown Added Dec 25, 2017 - 12:40am
 David Montaigne It's nice to see someone who gets it but unfortunately there is an abundance of so called "feminists" out there who strongly disagree.  They believe a women shares no blame if she willingly engages in knowingly risky behavior.  In their world women never deserve criticism. 
Personally I think those so called "feminists" do more harm than good to women by insisting relatively minor abuse is just as serious as violent rape.  When they claim they have been abused and demand sympathy I wonder if they were beaten and or raped, or just verbally insulted, or perhaps touched inappropriately. It might all be the same to them, and I have no right to ask, so I tend to assume claims that are very unspecific were relatively minor infractions.  That is unfair to women who really have been raped or really badly abused.
Passion Blues Added Dec 25, 2017 - 8:20am
Riley - I always enjoy your articles. You say things that most people try to avoid saying. Some people are just uncomfortable with the obvious. And you always carry on intelligent responses. I really appreciate your logic. Just keep doing what you are doing and I will keep reading
Passion Blues Added Dec 25, 2017 - 8:22am
My father used to tell me that if you lay with dogs you get fleas. Its not the dogs fault if you catch them. 
Dave Volek Added Dec 25, 2017 - 10:57am
It's great that you are making these points and challenging the sexually liberated feminists.
When a woman dresses provocatively for a night on the nightclub, she becomes a target for sexual advances. Most women who take on this social outing just take the advances in stride. They either accept or reject the offer--and think nothing of it. Yet in the workplace, the rules are much different. And maybe they should be! But then that begs the question if a women gets sexual advances at a club, can that too become grounds for illegal conduct? 
On the flip side, guys that make sexual advances are playing a numbers game. They know that these advances sometimes work. Make 10 passes, get laid once, not bad odds. Guys wouldn't be making these advances if there were no cooperating females out there.
Let's add in the celebrity factor. Is the celebrity using his position of power to unduly coerce sexual favors? Or is the "victim" using the celebrity to put a "notch in her gun" of the celebrities she had sex with?
This is getting very confusing. It's best not to play this game.
George N Romey Added Dec 25, 2017 - 11:53am
Sex, power and money have always been interwoven. One person good looking one person with money and power. Lots of questions between the two.
Riley Brown Added Dec 25, 2017 - 12:54pm
David, your analogy about getting laid made me laugh.  When I was younger I was a dancing fool and never shy about asking attractive women to dance.  I freely told everyone that there was a ratio of no thank you's to yes's, and each time someone said no I was that much closer to the yes.
I know plenty of happily married people who met at work, and many of them would never dreamed of going to a bar or club.  I never dated anyone from work but must admit people who don't otherwise get out really don't have many other choices.  I suppose they could try the internet, and perhaps that's ok for young folks but I'd never do it.
I know there are many women at work who hope to get noticed by one of the guys they work with and do dress and flirt with that in mind. 
Riley Brown Added Dec 25, 2017 - 1:01pm
George, in the past almost all the corporate power was in the hands of men, and that is one reason why practically all we hear about are men taking advantage of their authority 20 to 30 years ago. 
Just wait, now that more women are becoming powerful execs, in another 20 years we will hear the same thing from lots of men.  However I doubt it will be in court because men don't sue because their female boss exposed her breasts to them in a suggestive manner, they giggle and get on with life.  No grown man ever threatened to sue because his female boss slapped him on the rear.
Even today with all the women's lib we still have completely different expectations for men and women.  Kept women are so common that no one even blinks an eye, but men who are kept as boy toys quickly lose their Man Card in the eyes of most men and women.
Riley Brown Added Dec 25, 2017 - 1:03pm
Passion Blues, you dad was a very wise man.  I find it quite surprising that so many "feminists" and their adamant supporters can't admit a woman does have much more control over her fate than most of them seem to suggest is possible.
Thomas Napers Added Dec 26, 2017 - 12:33am
“They believe a women shares no blame if she willingly engages in knowingly risky behavior.  In their world women never deserve criticism.”  
“Blame” is the wrong choice of words for a woman that it the victim of sexual assault.  Perhaps a victim could have done more to prevent being sexually assaulted, she should never blamed for being assaulted.  Blame is always 100% the fault of the perpetrator. 
“Personally I think those so called "feminists" do more harm than good to women by insisting relatively minor abuse is just as serious as violent rape.”
Kindly direct me to one feminist that believes such a ridiculous thing like that. 
Riley Brown Added Dec 26, 2017 - 1:06am
Thomas to me "blame"  indicates some level of responsibility and women who deliberately put themselves in risky positions are certainly not as deserving of my sympathy as those who don't.
If your daughter wanted to be a star would you advise her to agree to meet Harvey Weinstein in a hotel and follow him into the bedroom?  If she did would you tell her "It's ok, go ahead, I'm sure it will work out well because if something goes wrong it won't be your fault"? 
I certainly wouldn't, I tell her that if she does stupid things often enough odds are she will eventually get bit.
As for feminists who want to treat men like Harvey Weinstein to life in prison, just like would be done for rapists, all you have to do is open and read the right forums.  Heck, some men in this forum seem to feel that way.
 Part of the problem is that many may not realize how short a sentence many rapists get especially with good behavior, when they act like a husband that wakes up horny and won't take NO for an answer, deserves just as long a prison term.
Jeffry Gilbert Added Dec 26, 2017 - 6:15am
Heck, some men in this forum seem to feel that way.
Because their wives have instructed them to "feel" that way. 
Bill Kamps Added Dec 26, 2017 - 8:07am
The guys who assault women are to blame and are the perpetrators.
The difference in the question is, who is to blame vs was the woman engaging in careless behavior.  If I walk down a dark dangerous street alone, and unarmed, and I get mugged, the mugger is the one that gets arrested.  That the mugger is to blame, doesnt change that I was still mugged, and I was engaging in careless behavior which gave the mugger his opportunity.   We could say  that I share some of the responsibility for the outcome, but the mugger broke the law, not me.  The mugger gets arrested, not me.
In the perfect world I should be able to walk down any street at any time, but we all know its not a perfect world.   Therefore I take some reasonable precautions.
If a woman goes out and dresses provocatively she is not inviting rape.  Yes she could dress modestly, or even stayed at home and been safer.  But does she always have to be on the defensive every time she makes a decision?  When she picks her shoes, do we want her asking if this is inviting rape?
However, if a women agrees to meet Harvey in his hotel bedroom for a "business" meeting she is obviously inviting problems.  Only a few times have I had business meetings with women in hotel rooms.  Those were large suites, we didnt meet in the bedroom, they were with women I knew really well, and I asked them first if it was ok with them to meet there.  If I didnt know the woman well, or if the hotel room didnt have a separate bedroom,  we met in a public area. 
There is a lot of grey areas in this.  Starlets willingly went to Harvey's casting couch.  Now some women will say they did it because they felt it was the only way they could get ahead.   People have choices, and at some point we are responsible for the choices we make.  We cant just say, "it was the only thing I could do".  Because what they are really saying is, "it was the only thing I could do, to get what I wanted". 
The range of sexual abuse is wide.  It ranges from inappropriate emails, to forceable rape.   Its not all lumped together.  I have been a manager in a few cases, and we try to make the resulting action fit the severity of the problem. 
Riley Brown Added Dec 26, 2017 - 11:33am
Bill Kamps I have little more sympathy for a starlet who holds her nose and submits to outrageous and illegal sexual harassment so she can try to get quid quo pro benefits than I do for a prostitute who does the same so she can put bread on her families table.  We all make choices, and that's the choice they made.
Without getting into the morality of what they are willing to sell to get what they want, I'd say they made the choice willingly and therefore have no right to complain any more than a firefighter has the right to complain because their employer demands they do very dangerous things on a regular basis. 
If you don't want to do something, it's up to you to take reasonable steps to avoid situations that increase your exposure to those risks.
Blame is a lot more than "guilty of breaking the law".  The law only punishes people for breaking the law, it never rewards people for steps they take to avoid becoming victims. 
The moral of my forum is that we all have obligations to keep ourselves and those we care for as safe as is reasonably possible.  If we don't and count on the decency and morality of potential abusers to keep us safe, we are being foolish, increasing our chances of being victimized, and yes, more to blame if it happens than we'd be if we took reasonable precautions.
The forum has also focused on the Hollywood abuse we've all heard so much about and I state my opinion rather strongly, all those who continued to play the game, (sex for advancement), share the blame.  The perpetrators who broke the law are guilty in the eyes of the law, and to me those who offered up their bodies, are also just as guilty as the Johns who hire prostitutes.
Not that long ago only the prostitutes got arrested, but today we also recognize the John is also guilty, not of prostitution but without them, the crime of prostitution could not exist. 
If sexy willing starlets were not standing in line to get into Harvey's casting couch, he'd have been out of business too.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Dec 26, 2017 - 12:00pm
Just curious, can we all agree that blame is to be had for both if actresses sleep with filthy producers for roles and move on?
I mean, there has been a cascade of allegations (e.g. Al Franken 'jokingly' grabbed the boobs of a sleeping soldier, the Kevin Spacey pedophilia etc).
Can this thread become a bit more open on how to avoid that the rest of our culture becomes like a Hollywood cesspool? Let's agree that we don't send our daughters to cesspools and that daughters who go anyway are to be blamed to some extend.
Some ideas about other situations of harrassment, suggested precautions and how we make 'dark alley situations' and Hollywood as niche as possible so women can move freely?
Bill Kamps Added Dec 26, 2017 - 12:09pm
Riley,  regarding your statement on starlets, if you think you strongly disagree with me, perhaps you should reread my next to last paragraph.  Perhaps I was too subtle.
Yes we should all take reasonable precautions.  The question becomes under what circumstances should women take precautions against sexual abuse?   Should avoidance of abuse be a regular presence in their minds?  I dont think we want to be in that place in society.
Reasonable women know better than to dress provocatively and then walk dangerous streets, in the dark, alone.  But what about just going to a nice club with friends?  Do they always need to be on guard as the women in India have to be? some of whom get raped on the  bus going to work.
I think the revelations of the past couple of months go beyond what most of thought was happening.  Sure we all knew about the casting couch, and for most of those starlets I have little sympathy.  What we didnt know that much about were people like Matt Lauer, or those that behaved similarly.  Guys who preyed upon women and then  used their position and power to get away with it.  While it doesnt surprise me that those in Congress committed abuse, it did surprise me that the rules of Congress made it almost impossible for the truth to come out, and that tax payers were paying the bill to pay off the victims after they signed NDA agreements.
As I have said before in other places.  Every situation is different, and there is a wide range of behavior that qualifies as abuse.  In some cases the women were complicit, in most they were not.
If the past couple of months give more women the courage to report abuse when it starts, I think it will go quite a ways to reducing its occurrence. 
Dave Volek Added Dec 27, 2017 - 11:21am
Without getting into the morality of what they are willing to sell to get what they want, I'd say they made the choice willingly and therefore have no right to complain any more than a firefighter has the right to complain because their employer demands they do very dangerous things on a regular basis. 
On one level, you are quite right. On another level, we still have an obligation to make all dangerous occupations a little safer. I would say that firefighting today, although still a relatively dangerous occupation, is much safer than it was in 1970.
The same goes for Hollywood. Aspiring actors should rise on their own merits rather than who they slept with. Predators should be shown the door out of this profession. And this is happening. Good thing!
mark henry smith Added Dec 27, 2017 - 12:31pm
I've behaved badly. I've been overly rambunctious. I was taught that what's men were supposed to do, push the envelope, pun intended.
I've always wanted sex with every attractive woman I've ever met. I make no secret of it which makes me totally inept at playing the game, and then to make matters even worse, I write about it.
If you asked me if I ever raped a woman (anybody for that matter) I would honestly say no. Not only haven't I raped anybody (only women float my boat) but I am convinced that I have prevented a rape or two by insisting that young women leave a place where the atmosphere was growing violent. That she went back later shows where she was coming from. She liked that kind of action, being the star of the show.
So I've looked at sexual abuse from both sides now, from up and down and still somehow it's sexual abuse illusions I recall, I really don't know sexual abuse at all. But as the great litigator said about porn, I really can't define it, but I know it when I see it.
With credit s to Judy Collins and Learned Hand, or was it Clarence Thomas, I always get those two confused.  
George N Romey Added Dec 28, 2017 - 8:24am
There is little data in part because women coming forward on a mass scale is new. Then there is all the side opinions. Aspiring actress meets big time producer in a hotel room in low cut dress and short skirt. She wants the part of beautiful young woman.
Rape is rape. I have the feeling we are going to see more of this.
Riley Brown Added Dec 29, 2017 - 12:21am
Benjamin to address your question about what we can do to make things better, I think we need to attack both sides of the issue, just like they do with prostitution.  Right now we pounding the sleazy guys who prey on lose women, but lets not forget that most of the acts that hit the papers right now wouldn't if those men weren't so wildly successful most of the time.  Lose women enable and encourage them and they too should be equally criticized but that hasn't happened.  They often say the difference between a raped prostitute and one who wasn't raped is that the one who didn't get paid will say she was raped. 
In Hollywood we idolize women on the silver screen even when they act sleazy in public like most women do who hit the big time in show business when they were young.  Many young girls admire and emulate the bad girl image they see on the screen, and many don't think it's bad to offer up their own sexuality in trade for advantages.  We popularize bad behavior, from the men and women.
Guys who are real men on the silver screen can have their way with any woman they choose, and lots of powerful men buy into that image just like some real life mobsters who emulated what they saw on the sliver screen.  That's not new, John Wayne also inspired bad behaviors.
I don't believe in most government censorship but I sure believe in people boycotting things they think are bad for society.  I think it's time we demonize all the bad players, not just the men, and not watching their productions would be a great way to vote with our dollars and feet.  Do you really want to support sleaze bags like Harvey, or the women who prostituted themselves to him, so they could be a star?
Riley Brown Added Dec 29, 2017 - 12:34am
Dave, as long as there are powerful producers and willing women, there will be casting couches.  Many of the Hollywood encounters we hear about took place out of sight in places where oversight is impossible.
To stop this behavior we'd have to require all meetings take place in supervised settings in workplace environments and the men and the women participating in this behavior both don't want that to happen. 
The men would lose easy sex and the women would be forced to compete solely based on their acting talent.  Both of them like the perks they get from the casting couch.
I've often told potential employers I welcome tough background checks and drug tests because they eliminate much of my competition.  I'm sure the type of women who offer up sex to get ahead don't mind, but rather enjoy the fact that they can pass by much of their most competent competition by simply offering potential employers something that more legitimate applicants are unwilling or reluctant to offer.
Riley Brown Added Dec 29, 2017 - 12:35am
Chris Crawford, what is it that I say that you doubt or don't see evidence of in the news?  Please be much more specific so I can address properly.
Riley Brown Added Dec 29, 2017 - 4:28pm
Chris Crawford, several women met Harvey at hotels and then followed him from the entry or living room into the bedroom or bathroom.  I'm not saying they did, that's what they are claiming. 
Katherine Kendall went to his house, target="_blank" name="ramplink_Mira Sorvino_">Mira Sorvino met him at a hotel and at his apartment. Louisette Geiss went to his hotel.  The list goes on and on.  These are all women who turned him down, and obviously didn't get "the job".
Would you ever advise you daughter to meet a man who claims he might have a job for her, at his house or hotel room, for an interview?
I didn't think so.
As for the ones who did trade sex so get the jobs, do you really expect them to come forward and say it wasn't talent that got them the job, it was being willing to spread their legs?
Benjamin Goldstein Added Dec 29, 2017 - 5:14pm
m h smith: I've been overly rambunctious. I was taught that what's men were supposed to do, push the envelope, pun intended.
It is what a man is supposed to do.
Riley: I think we need to attack both sides of the issue
Okay. How?
emulate the bad girl image they see on the screen, and many don't think it's bad to offer up their own sexuality in trade for advantages.
I don't think that this is bad behavior, either. Seriously. And frankly I think we are reaching a point were normal heterosexual behavior is demonized. Women should try to sleep up, not down. Thought experiment: My daughter introduces a chummy janitor, who I like instantly, or she introduces a lawyer, who hates all my hobbies, makes stupid jokes, moralizes about my jokes and is a bitch. What is better? The lawyer. He just has to please her and women have a knack for looking for high-status individuals. As a good daddy I should hide my animus!
I don't understand what bad behavior real man inspire. (I don't know John Wayne)
I don't believe in boycotts AT ALL, and it annoys me whenever somebody, on the left or on the right, calls for one.
I also don't know what bad behavior women see on screen. I'm not into tabloids, but I have heard about the Miley Cyrus ass shaking. I liked it. I hope women take example. Women should try to attract a reasonable number of men to choose from. Men should try to compete for women. Status is absolutely legit as a weapon. So is showing your muscles. So is humor. So is showing evidence that you get into physical fights (e.g. military uniform, cauliflower ears ...). So is fame. Men compete. Women attact and select. It shouldn't be destroyed with silly neo-Victorian morals. Some of us are straight.
Riley Brown Added Dec 30, 2017 - 1:10pm
Chris I am surprised you have done so much business in people's hotel rooms, I travel a lot for business, and have had lots of meetings in hotels, but always in meeting rooms they rent for the purpose.  I know they usually have their own rooms in the hotel and some of the rooms I've been checked into were set up so I could hold a meeting in the outer living room, but I've never done that.
That aside I guess the nature of the business might make a difference, I've know about the Hollywood casting couch since I was in my 20's and would never let my daughter meet anyone looking for starlets in a hotel, especially under the circumstances many of these girls did where I'd have to ask "why not at his office?"
The Burghal Hidage Added Dec 30, 2017 - 1:56pm
Wow Riley! Aren't you lucky? You've just been schooled. Was it good for you? Thank heavens there are are still those ready and willing to serve as the arbiters of social protocols. Any one else getting all warm and fuzzy?
Riley Brown Added Dec 31, 2017 - 11:01am
Chris, forgive me if I don't join you in your liberated lifestyle.
You are welcome to tell your daughters it's OK to meet men in hotels for business meetings, because it's not the 50's and they aren't allowed to solicit or touch them. 
I on the other hand will continue to tell my daughters that many men will continue to want and hope they can get sex from them, so even when they use the pretext of a wonderful business opportunity, don't meet them in their private hotel room to conduct business.  I've told mine that men with real business on their mind go out of their way to make the business environment convenient for the people they think can do a good job.  A hotel room is a poor place for a wanna be starlet to show off her talent unless she wants to star in a porn movie.
I think if you advise your friends your way and I mine, we are both more likely to get what we deserve as a result.
I do think it was tougher to find lose women, even in Hollywood back in the 50's than it is today.  Back then an unwanted pregnancy was a much scarier thought because the only birth control was relatively unreliable and it was much harder to quietly treat the common STD's than it is today.  Today women have the pill and many take casual sex right in stride.  Perhaps that's why men like Harvey don't have scores of recent women accusing them.  There might be an abundance of starlets who give it away very openly and they don't need to solicit anymore.  That's what happens to top athletes, they don't have to solicit, they take their pick of the willing.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Dec 31, 2017 - 11:37am
I on the other hand will continue to tell my daughters that many men will continue to want and hope they can get sex from them
You look quite young on the avatar for somebody who has to tell his daughters about sex and business.
I will hand the information to my daughters so they can assess the risks for themselves. Ideally, I want them to get married first (now, that is old fashioned; I wasn't in that moral mind-set at the time). As I said above it is ultimately her/their choice once they are older than 16 and I acknowledge their guilt if they happen to make poor choices.
As somebody who is very pro-liberty, I'm happy that you can offer your chaperoning views. I just happen to disagree with them. I also did not chime in on most of your queer articles because the issue is a complete sideshow in my humble opinion and that comes from somebody who is increasingly drawn to the issue of masculinity and femininity.
I am happy to stand up for the rights of all those who don't conform well with their gender. I also happen to see a bigger issue with tolerance for those who do really conform well.
There is an intolerance as a result of the beta-male mainstreaming that lashes out against either end of the spectrum. And I take issue with that. Yet I'm happy about any representative who is honest and bold enough to do the lashing openly. So thanks a lot and I wish you a happy new year.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Dec 31, 2017 - 11:58am
Chris: As you can imagine, I don't agree with your nature vs nurture position.
I don't have an issue categorising loose women and sexually careful women. My issue is that there is nothing wrong with 'loose' women. Women want sex. Women also trade sex for status (nature). I find both acceptable. Ideally, a woman chooses a man to gain advantage by getting the guy to marry her, too, so the kids have a stable home. With precautions she can also advance her career with sex as long as she doesn't have children and neglects them.
Why do we moralize over women for ordinary female behavior? I still rather see the 'sluts' carrying a gun than being restricted in their lifestyle. They shall be respected like any other woman.
Happy new year to you, too.
Riley Brown Added Dec 31, 2017 - 5:55pm
Chris, you are free to evolve as you wish but for the sake of your friends and children if you have any, I do hope you don't encourage them to bet on this new morality to keep them safe.
I do lots of things to keep me safe and pretty much all despite the fact that pretty much all the precautions I take would not be necessary if I could count on other people to do the right thing.
I lock my house, and my car, recently I covered up Christmas presents in my car so no one could see them, and there are parts of town I won't go into late at night too.  Yes, and I also advise my friends to say away from Hollywood types because most of the guys who tell girls they think they have what it takes to be a star, only want to make them a star in their own bedroom.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Jan 1, 2018 - 7:08am
Chris Crawford: I still count behavior that you attribute to nurture to nature. Using the language of nature and nurture does not take away from your "pyramide" notion that the qualities interact with each other and are sharpened or tamed.
It remains true that women could use assistance in raising children, but that is partially addressed with greater reliance on allomothering. 
This is an example of what I mean. The brave new world isn't the future. Single motherhood is destructive. There will be a reassessment of morals simply because nurture can deface some aspects of our natural characteristics, but with a cost and they still shine through. Our morals are going to change again or our civilisation will inevitably fall.
Riley Brown: Do you realize that even Chris, who is a presumably a liberal, thinks that you are too much of a wussy? Sorry that I use terminology like beta male and wussy for the lack of better words, but I kind of want to tease a reflection on it out of you.
Some risk taking is a good choice. For every woman who gets raped in a hotel room, a hundred make a business deal or, fair enough, advance themselves with sex. You may argue that women will end up overchallenged in positions that they are not qualified for. But that is ultimately the moral fault of the male who has the power to do that because he has the finance to support her on his own and put her soon back into a professional position adequate for her skill set. If he ignores her incompetence he is damaging his business, his employees and himself. She, on the other hand, does everything rightly.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Jan 1, 2018 - 12:00pm
Chris Crawford: No the ideal of a single mother has only recently become common. Women always had spent most of their time with their children, even as they were working on the fields (as were the children themselves). A man must first and foremost keep free her back and supply the material goods as well as the protections.
It is silly that men don't have children because they think they have to be loving and caring. No, he loves and cares for the woman who does the loving and caring for the children. A loving father is a father who loves the mother. I simplify, but not too much.
This gender confusion is why we don't procreate anymore. You probably think that either something with your personal innate characteristics are unfatherly or that something with your childhood went wrong when in reality most men are like you. It's nature, stupid!
We must dispense of the idea that children are the chattel of the state.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Jan 1, 2018 - 2:01pm
Chris Crawford: G-d knows what exactly you have in mind speaking of allomothering. The mother should have as much time with her children as she wants and as is possible.
That [leaving the childrearing largely to the mother] is precisely what was true in the past and is now completely false.
Which in turn is why must organise this again.
there's no question that the father can supply crucial elements of nurture that a mother cannot.
It's not a big deal. Men shouldn't avoid babies because they are not mothers but men. I would even think that a motherly man who does all the nappy changes is less capable of providing the manly elements of parenting than a less caring father.
No, the reduction in female fertility is primarily due to the effects of economic progress, especially female education. 
Provide less laborers for the job market and increase the cost of labor so the father can provide the lion share. Build the wall!
I take it, then, that you consider it inappropriate for the state to remove children from homes where they are beaten, raped, or starved. I disagree.
That is exactly right. We disagree. Remove the beater, rapist, and torturer (starvation). Throw him into jail. Leave the kids with the family.
Riley Brown Added Jan 1, 2018 - 2:29pm
Benjamin, possibly part of the reason Chris may think I'm just a big wuss is because he many not have nearly as much experience around Hollywierd as I do, I live very close to there and do know what goes on there well.  I know several girls who have wanted to become models, a few who made it a little, and causally know many women who work as extra's.  None of them doesn't have stories to tell.
If you are an unknown girl who wants to be a star, you will be subject to abuse if you try to do it in Hollywood, and having sex with people who tell you they are influential is no guarantee you will get what you want. 
I have also met a few photographers who tell wild stories about the girls they have taken advantage of, who very willingly offered them sex hoping for favors.
Part of the equation has to be the individual situation.  Hollywood is a small part of LA and LA is not that big.   All the important Hollywood people do have offices, and meeting rooms, and there is no legitimate reason for not using them.  Why would they invite you to a hotel when it's probably not any closer than their office?  Why would they even rent a hotel when they live and work close by?   If they invite you to meet with them while they are on a trip, you need to ask yourself  why wouldn't they just meet with you when they get back to LA?  I've had friends tell me they were told there wouldn't be an opportunity if they didn't meet them out of town on a trip in a hotel, and that's is a red flag to me. 
That is not the same as going to another city our country to do business and meeting people wherever is necessary.  I travel for business all the time, and often meet at remote locations, but it's always some place we can spread out materials and talk, sometimes a rented meeting room at a hotel.  Usually it's someplace they can have food served too, but never their hotel room.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Jan 1, 2018 - 2:37pm
Chris Crawford:
We seem to agree that major changes in family values are necessary to meet current economic conditions.
Yes, a child that grows up with a lot of time with his mother is economically more successful than a daycare single-motherhood child.
quote Crawford: You appear to adhere to ancient notions of manhood, while my perception reflects the situation we find ourselves in currently.
also quote Crawford: This has been known since time immemorial. See the Mabinogeon tale "Culhwch and Olwen" for a good example of this folk wisdom. 
What now? Is your image of manhood ancient or a snapshot of our time? I'm talking of basic natural characteristics. You wrote yourself: it's true that the father does not have the powerful chemical stimuli that amplify motherly love
You jump around so much that I wonder if you have any position at all.
Your basic economics is full-blown Marxist crap. You know nothing.
What if both parents are culpable? Drug addicts? 
Nana and auntie.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Jan 1, 2018 - 2:50pm
Riley, yes, any sensible person would advice his daughter not to bang a Hollyweirdo. They won't even make it, banging all of the producers. Somehow whenever Hollywood gets mentioned I get bored. It's my ancient manhood.
Chris Crawford: You do jump around. I made the effort to contrast quote your own crap against each other. Either your idea of manhood is ancient or just point perfect for modern life. You are either dishonest or an idiot. If you can muster some honesty, you can resolve your inconsistency or admit the inconsistency.
I don't go with you through your marxist crap entirely. The market relevant for the wage is the labor market and its supply is the workers. I could but won't waste my time on going on about your secondary product cost consideration. It's off the mark completely and irrelevant.
mark henry smith Added Jan 2, 2018 - 1:18pm
It has been shown through studies that most men choose women for their attractiveness and most women choose men for their intelligence.
Now, the problem is that attractiveness is variable according to the standards you were raised with. Hottentots would find the slinky seductresses we favor an odd flavor. And how can a woman really know if a man is truly intelligent before sleeping with him, because by the time most women get that close to a man they've both had so much to drink that it's just genital grabbing and slobber. So we place artificial gauges.
She has a nice butt. He has a nice car. And we let that suffice. And I agree with Benjamin, a slut is not better than monogamy nut, it's not as if your sex habits determine your character in the broader sphere. I've known sluts who did volunteer work at animal shelters and homeless kitchens and didn't sleep with any of the animals. They just liked sex and felt comfortable liking sex. More power to 'em, I say, but where are they today?
And all this gay this, and queer that, the LBTGYATUVWXYZ stuff is getting blown way out of proportion. My mission should not be to accept you the way you want to be accepted. My mission should be to encourage you to be a decent human being in the same way I encourage everyone else, and have your sexual proclivities be your business. Same with abortion. Same with so many things. And the line between consent and rape is like the strips in a candy cane. It's very clear when you start licking, but becomes less and less. Love ya' Riley   
Riley Brown Added Jan 7, 2018 - 12:30am
Chris I think you need to get out more.  I sense you think your personal experiences apply well to other parts of the country where you have no experience.  In the world you live and work in that might make perfect sense but in Hollywood your values and sensibilities would not work.
You are not alone, Hollywood types love and prey on naive people like you from other parts of the country all the time, usually their young and in my world we'd say they aren't "street smart".  They like you, are generally good and trusting people, who know what's right and are much more easily misled then people who live here and already know the game.
A lot of starlets come to Hollywood from other parts of the country and I think most of them already have an idea what it's really like, but they come anyway seeking opportunity.  They flounder when they can't get jobs and pretty soon they are desperate enough to take chances and maybe even try to gain an edge by offering things like sex, to improve their quickly dwindling chances.  If it works and they suddenly have money in their pocket, it gets easier and easier to do again.  It's hard to stop doing something that works when stopping can put you right back in the poor house.
Oh and it doesn't just happen to women, believe it or not there are lots of men who take that ride too, Hollywood is not just a place for lose women, lose men can catch that train too.
As I said I don't think you get out much, come to Hollywood and skip the tour buss, instead try walking the streets at night and listen to what people say.  Even better get a young and generally attractive girl to do that and see how long it takes her to get unusually helpful offers from complete strangers who suddenly take a liking to her.  I'm guessing that isn't nearly as common where you live but it is here in Hollywierd.
Riley Brown Added Jan 7, 2018 - 3:26pm
Chris we are just going to have to disagree, you believe it would be prudent to tell your daughter to meet a Hollywood producer in a hotel room and I never would. 
You believe that if a girl uses her sexuality to get a leg up she does not invite abuse or have any responsibility if she puts out to keep her employment advantage.  I say she shares the blame because without girls like her, there would be no crime.
I suppose you also don't think people who buy child porn should be treated like criminals, because they didn't abuse the children.
If you don't like people who kill elephants for ivory, don't  buy it, the same principal applies to this forum topic.
Riley Brown Added Jan 8, 2018 - 11:45pm
 Chris Crawford in this very forum you used your own wife to make a point and I quote:
"My wife has met with business associates in their hotel rooms, and I have never had any concerns. "
Of course I have no idea if you really have a wife, or even if you're real name is Chris, but you did use the example to try and convince me it's OK for women to meet men in hotel rooms, when we were discussing what often happens in the Hollywood environment.
So tell me did you lie about not being concerned, make up a convenient story, not really care what happens to your wife, or just can't remember what you've said?
I suggest you reread your previous posts before commenting again.
Riley Brown Added Jan 10, 2018 - 11:18pm
Chris, you said "No, I don't believe the things you claim"
My question to you in this forum, (your can reread it yourself):
"Would you ever advise you daughter to meet a man who claims he might have a job for her, at his house or hotel room, for an interview?"

Your response:

Sure I would!
I still think we need to agree to disagree, even if you can't remember what you've said.