Epstein, Kiddies, And Trump. Oh, My

[Toni]

...and yet again I find myself astonished that US workers haven't risen up in bloody revolution and hanged their bosses from the streetlamps, or set up guillotines in the Capitol Mall.

Or even just collectively agreed to not work for anyone who treats them like shit.

Perhaps they remember some history.
The guillotines led to Napoloeon which led to the invasion of Russia and Waterloo.
The frogs have not won a war since.

France set itself back 30 years with their revolution.

Did it? By what measure?

French peasants probably wouldn't care too much if France didn't go to war with Russia, or expand her empire, of if French GDP fell, or French wine exports collapsed.

By whose standards are you measuring "back 30 years"?

Military and economic strength on the world stage are not the only measures of a nation.

Everyone knows monarchies are the best!

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Appealing the ruling doesn't taint anything. It means he goes to the higher court and explains why he thinks the lower court is wrong.

Biden didn't even try that.

Why didn't Biden try that?

Did he want them sealed for reasons other than tainting the jury?

You still NOT going to get over the burden Trump has now to do exactly what you say and release the files, assuming he was innocent which he wasn't. Clown around all you want, people see what you are.

That's not my burden, that's a Republican burden. You bear the Democrat burden. I bear the Libertarian burden. I criticized Trump for not releasing them, and Johnson for keeping congress out of session to avoid a vote in the issue. Find a Republican to defend Trump and Johnson on this.

So, why didn't Biden appeal the ruling?

No, to appeal you have to show what the lower court did wrong. And "a decision you don't like" is not something you can appeal. You have to find something wrong about the process.

I did not write "a decision you don't like", I wrote "explains why he thinks the lower court is wrong". Nice of you to imply something that isn't there.

I'm sure grounds can be found, even if he knows the appeal would fail as well. Then he could say he tried, which would make him a better president and a better person.

 

[bilby]

...and yet again I find myself astonished that US workers haven't risen up in bloody revolution and hanged their bosses from the streetlamps, or set up guillotines in the Capitol Mall.

Or even just collectively agreed to not work for anyone who treats them like shit.

Perhaps they remember some history.
The guillotines led to Napoloeon which led to the invasion of Russia and Waterloo.
The frogs have not won a war since.

France set itself back 30 years with their revolution.

Did it? By what measure?

French peasants probably wouldn't care too much if France didn't go to war with Russia, or expand her empire, of if French GDP fell, or French wine exports collapsed.

By whose standards are you measuring "back 30 years"?

Military and economic strength on the world stage are not the only measures of a nation.

Everyone knows monarchies are the best!

Trump certainly seems to think so.

 

[Tigers!]

Brooke Shields considers herself to have been massively abused in the making of that movie.

Does she? [citation needed]

Brooke Shields Ignored ‘Blue Lagoon’ Director’s Phone Call After She Criticized the Film for Exploiting Her ‘Sexual Awakening’

Brooke Shields says "The Blue Lagoon" exploited her sexual awakening.

variety.com

Your claim was that she was "massively abused". The article does not back up your claim.
It is true that she feels exploited in hindsight of several decades and changes in societal attitudes toward how teenage sexuality is portrayed, but that is not the same as being "abused" on set, much less "massively" so.

You’ve never been a 14 year old girl, much less a 14 year old girl with a stage mother.

Girls are very much raised to not make waves, to be ‘nice’ which means compliant. It is difficult to push back against violation of boundaries if you have never been allowed to have boundaries.

I realize that it is a common fantasy for some males that 14 year old girls are just waiting for some man to awaken their innermost sexual desires. But that’s a male fantasy. 14 year olds are children, even if their bodies arouse sexual desire in adults. 14 year olds are trying to figure themselves out, to figure out what, if any, say they have about their own lives, their own thoughts, their own feelings. Those are just everyday 14 year olds. Add in all of the adults telling you you must do this or it will hurt your career . Brooke Shiekds’ mother was divorced and put her daughter in commercials at age 11 MONTHS. Her income depended upon her daughter’s career, pressure that was not lost on her daughter as it is never lost on any child, particularly the only child of a mother. Her mother saw Brooke as ‘a sexy child’ and capitalized on that, monetarily and emotionally. FWIW, the actors who played Romeo and Juliet felt similarly exploited, and had been told that they would be wearing body suits during the infamous love scene and then were not allowed to wear body suits and told that their willingness to do the scene nude would determine whether the film succeeded or failed. That’s an enormous amount of pressure to put on a kid who lacks the maturity and agency and who has no life experience to help them advocate for themselves.

I think a lot of adult men confuse their own feelings with what it is like to be a 14 or 15 year old girl.

In other words, the problem was her mother, not the producers.

Part of the problem was the mother, but another part of the problem was priducets pushing those roles and expectations.

Exactly. The DIRECTOR and the producers are to blame because if it hadn’t been Brooke Shiekds, it would face been some other child. Let’s not leave out the studio heads and all the other big wheels and money guys who wanted to make a pen adjacent film featuring an actual CHILD. And everyone else who produced these films, marketed, booked these films. And let’s not let off the green ass men who looooved these movies so much—and who told their middle school students about how great the films were ( true story but unlikely confined to just one teacher or just my town) possibly not being very conscious of exactly what it was that so delighted them.

Brooke Shields’ mother had a duty to protect her child. Absolutely. Movie studios are now held to standards that don’t legitimately allow them to exploit children in this way.

If people did not wish to see such material it not would not be made.
The blame/fault is widespread.

 

[Toni]

Brooke Shields considers herself to have been massively abused in the making of that movie.

Does she? [citation needed]

Brooke Shields Ignored ‘Blue Lagoon’ Director’s Phone Call After She Criticized the Film for Exploiting Her ‘Sexual Awakening’

Brooke Shields says "The Blue Lagoon" exploited her sexual awakening.

variety.com

Your claim was that she was "massively abused". The article does not back up your claim.
It is true that she feels exploited in hindsight of several decades and changes in societal attitudes toward how teenage sexuality is portrayed, but that is not the same as being "abused" on set, much less "massively" so.

You’ve never been a 14 year old girl, much less a 14 year old girl with a stage mother.

Girls are very much raised to not make waves, to be ‘nice’ which means compliant. It is difficult to push back against violation of boundaries if you have never been allowed to have boundaries.

I realize that it is a common fantasy for some males that 14 year old girls are just waiting for some man to awaken their innermost sexual desires. But that’s a male fantasy. 14 year olds are children, even if their bodies arouse sexual desire in adults. 14 year olds are trying to figure themselves out, to figure out what, if any, say they have about their own lives, their own thoughts, their own feelings. Those are just everyday 14 year olds. Add in all of the adults telling you you must do this or it will hurt your career . Brooke Shiekds’ mother was divorced and put her daughter in commercials at age 11 MONTHS. Her income depended upon her daughter’s career, pressure that was not lost on her daughter as it is never lost on any child, particularly the only child of a mother. Her mother saw Brooke as ‘a sexy child’ and capitalized on that, monetarily and emotionally. FWIW, the actors who played Romeo and Juliet felt similarly exploited, and had been told that they would be wearing body suits during the infamous love scene and then were not allowed to wear body suits and told that their willingness to do the scene nude would determine whether the film succeeded or failed. That’s an enormous amount of pressure to put on a kid who lacks the maturity and agency and who has no life experience to help them advocate for themselves.

I think a lot of adult men confuse their own feelings with what it is like to be a 14 or 15 year old girl.

In other words, the problem was her mother, not the producers.

Part of the problem was the mother, but another part of the problem was priducets pushing those roles and expectations.

Exactly. The DIRECTOR and the producers are to blame because if it hadn’t been Brooke Shiekds, it would face been some other child. Let’s not leave out the studio heads and all the other big wheels and money guys who wanted to make a pen adjacent film featuring an actual CHILD. And everyone else who produced these films, marketed, booked these films. And let’s not let off the green ass men who looooved these movies so much—and who told their middle school students about how great the films were ( true story but unlikely confined to just one teacher or just my town) possibly not being very conscious of exactly what it was that so delighted them.

Brooke Shields’ mother had a duty to protect her child. Absolutely. Movie studios are now held to standards that don’t legitimately allow them to exploit children in this way.

If people did not wish to see such material it not would not be made.
The blame/fault is widespread.

Oh, you do not need to convince me that the world is full of ‘men’ who want to diddle kids.

That doesn’t mean that Hollywood or anyone is obligated to provide fodder.

 

[Tigers!]

Oh, you do not need to convince me that the world is full of ‘men’ who want to diddle kids.

That doesn’t mean that Hollywood or anyone is obligated to provide fodder.

No argument on me on that score.