Pretty much

“About people like Weinstein and the casting couch and all of that,” she says, “I have a confession. In my day, if you went up to a guy’s hotel room, you knew exactly why you were going and in those days it was consensual. Times were different,”

Rather what my basic – base perhaps – analysis has been all along.

Leave aside what should be. The actual problem here is that we did have a set of rules. No matter how good or bad they were, a set of rules that all knew and which were abided by at that cost of social ostracism if they weren’t. Note again, this is not to say that they were good – or bad – rules. Just that they existed and were known.

Those rules are now in flux. We’ve a number of claims about what the new rules should be. And we’ve most certainly not come to a general societal agreement about what these new ones are.

Which is what the general problem is.

Now, to get back to what the rules should be. I go for capitalism and free markets because that’s, to my mind, the best way of dealing with and harnessing people as they actually are. Sure, socialism sounds fun, us all working altruistically for some greater good, it’s just that homo sapiens sapiens doesn’t do that. Socialism is for some other species, bees, ants maybe.

Rules about sex? Think that whatever the rules are should run with what human nature is. Sure, constrain the bad bits – as markets constrain the greed of capitalism – and promote the good. And entirely willing to agree that effective contraception/DNA tests etc change what the rules need to be even as they’ve not changed a couple of hundred thousand years of how we got here.

So, for example, virginity just ain’t what it used to be. And isn’t as we can all observe out there. But that people will trade what they’ve got for what they want hasn’t gone away – just as an example.

14 comments on “Pretty much

  1. “She also appears sympathetic to disquiet over Olivia Wilde’s character, Kathy Scruggs, the journalist who put Jewell in the headlines in the most negative way – and is the most venomous portrayal of a woman in an Eastwood movie for many years. Scruggs died of a drug overdose aged 42, which means she can’t defend herself against the film’s claim that she slept with an FBI agent (Jon Hamm) for the scoop.”

    Funny. The Left don’t usually worry about death being a barrier to clearing your name, do they? Or is it different when the subject is one of the hallowed ones?

  2. Is the FBI agent dead too?
    Can’t he sue over being accused of sleeping with this ‘venomous’ character?

  3. I don’t buy it. Times aren’t different. Actresses aren’t little girls from a convent school who have never seen a penis. I think they had sex with Harvey to advance their careers and then lied about it when the feminists offered to cover for them so they could score Harvey’s scalp.

  4. Changing social mores. Problem is that, while some girls are prepared to use feminine guile to support their ambition, others don’t want to play that game. Nor should they be obliged to. Ditto taking part in traditional Friday night post-work bonding booze sessions with colleagues. Pendulum is still swinging back from the 70s and 80s and may yet have some way to go. Rules of the game have changed and people change with them. However, there will always be willing buyers and sellers … and there will always be scumbags that take advantage.

  5. I could almost put it down to being a generational thing. Weinstein follows the old-fashioned rules, his accusers were following modern rules. But Weinstein was born in 1952; Rose McGowan in 1973. Did the rules change that much in such a short space of time?

  6. Andrew M, at least the studio system was dead by 1973, replaced by independent film makers like Cassavetes and Coppola. There is an excellent book by Peter Biskind, Easy Riders Raging Bulls.

  7. Jussi, I think it was David Niven in one of his autobiographies who describes the studio system dying out some decades earlier due to a campaign led by Olivia de Havilland who did not like being beholden to one firm and required to perform in any old nonsense she was ordered to take a role in. Whether or not the casting couch also played a part in her hostility to the system, I have no idea.

  8. Roue le Jour,

    That’s true, but what’s different in the rules is how society, or at least some sections of society treat it. Back in the 1940s, a starlet who slept with a producer was a tramp and that was that. Her peers, the media, politicians would have all joined with that.

    The problem I always find with feminism is that it really doesn’t have any rules except that women should always enjoy the most advantage in the situation. It’s irresponsible and childish.

    I do think one thing, though. There’s a lot of women out there who aren’t like this and don’t have much representation in the MSM. The MSM is stuffed full of young, metropolitan, liberal women and more grown up women are just chatting about stuff on Facebook and Mumsnet now.

  9. Yes, I think in the 60’s Warren Beatty was one of the first superstars, yes he was a superstar, who escaped the studio system under which people like Bogart and James Mason (go to your room or I shall beat you!) were on a weekly salary. Well, Bogart was dead by then of course, I would assume things started to change in the early 60’s. I’d like to think under the studio system actresses (I hope I am allowed to write actress instead of actor) had to spread their legs in exchange of a weekly salary and roles. I don’t really think that changed too much when stars like Ann-Margret, Tippi Hedgren and my favourite Tuesday Weld emerged in the early 60’s.

  10. Roué le Jour

    Yeap, that’s my take on it too. I am told Weinstein’s deals were quite formal, it wasn’t just an invite to the room, they knew in advance what they were agreeing too. Myleene Klass has said as much too, and she refused it.

  11. Jussi
    The real days of the studio system were well over by the end of the 1950s.
    In the 1920s, 30s, 40s a studio head might have a film due to start shooting next Monday and look at a chart of which stars, directors, Directors of Photography etc, all under contract, were available and populate the cast and crew accordingly. There would be the writers block on the studio lot where the likes of Jack Warner would walk down the corridor listening for any rooms where there wasn’t a typewriter tapping away. An actor could be suspended (the time added on to the end of their contract) for refusing a role.
    A film could be made entirely within the studio gates using entirely contract cast and crew.
    By the early 1960s the odd Producer might have a 3-picture deal with an actor, as Hitchcock did with Tippi Hedron or the Mirish Brothers did with George Chakiris but it was nothing like the old system as none of the Above The Line or creatives were under long-term contracts.
    This started the explosion in budgets as studios now had to bid for the services of an in-demand or reluctant star.

  12. Bernie G.

    Your argument sort of makes sense but the conclusion is not that those who slept with a producer to advance their careers are victims.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.