I know the Jehovah's Witnesses will use the excuse "we are no part of the world", but I think I'll waste some more time again and say that they might speak up for the poor man!
About? The witness rule!
About? The witness rule!
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I am thinking about poor Harvey Weinstein and JWs
- Thread starter savagewind
- Start date
Jehovah's Witnesses won't even secretly sanction a person who has had an accusation of sex abuse against him. The reason why is that if confronted he will deny it and since there is no proof of any misconduct he goes free. If he did do the deed, he will have to be more careful.
Now we have a man of power, privilege, and means who has acted unfavorably toward some people and his whole damn life gets smashed to smithereens and I think it is a strange world indeed where these two extremes can exist and be accepted.
Now we have a man of power, privilege, and means who has acted unfavorably toward some people and his whole damn life gets smashed to smithereens and I think it is a strange world indeed where these two extremes can exist and be accepted.
I am only 10% which proves that nobody gives a **** about what I think, but I am with Woopy Goldberg here. It seems that none of the women are crying "rape", just that he acted inappropriately. I might be wrong though.
She says they didn't have to play along with him and I believe that is the truth.
She says they didn't have to play along with him and I believe that is the truth.
Tmac
Active Member
The Jehovah Witness method (thoughtful) might not be to confront but you can believe they are not treated the same anymore.
When ever one of these situations come up, I think about the predator priest (or any position where you are in charge), looking into the eyes of the hopeful and knowing which are the weakest or which ones won't know when the are being taking advantage of them, it's like they go in with eyes wide shut.
Most of these people would never be found out if they didn't branch out. Its like they over extend themselves, too many variables to control.
BSM1
What? Me worry?
Now juxtapose this comment with Donald Trump who has had no credible accusation of inappropriate behavior at all. Can you spell hypocrisy?
A Vestigial Mote
Well-Known Member
From my experience, people generally don't go around accusing people of these sorts of things for the fun of it. Especially not multiple people mostly saying the same things. And there really isn't much way around it - we men have a visceral side with sexual desire. It's instinctual, animalistic and can be extremely compelling.
Normally if a woman comes forward and says a man did X, I tend to be very open to the possibility, especially if the woman has nothing to gain by coming forward and doesn't have a history of antagonizing the man in question.
It's really quite as simple as it is unfortunate - we men have the drive, women are the ones who remain choosy to insure the offspring is the most viable. The instincts drive their way deep into our psychology, and because we can't simply splay out our feathers and dance around, due to the fact that we are (supposedly) these "civilized" beings in modern human societies, these instincts have us doing alternative things "for show", in attempts to either impress or at least impart our desire/intent, that aren't necessarily on the up-and-up.
In "civilized" society this is (for the most part rightly) interpreted as a lack of control. You aren't your libido. It isn't as important in your life as it makes itself out to be. It can be controlled. Don't want to control it? Fine... just be prepared to live with the consequences, and definitely don't come crying to me. I know you... I am you. I have the same inclinations and live in the same modern societies. I just happen to have me under a (even if only slightly) tighter grip.
Normally if a woman comes forward and says a man did X, I tend to be very open to the possibility, especially if the woman has nothing to gain by coming forward and doesn't have a history of antagonizing the man in question.
It's really quite as simple as it is unfortunate - we men have the drive, women are the ones who remain choosy to insure the offspring is the most viable. The instincts drive their way deep into our psychology, and because we can't simply splay out our feathers and dance around, due to the fact that we are (supposedly) these "civilized" beings in modern human societies, these instincts have us doing alternative things "for show", in attempts to either impress or at least impart our desire/intent, that aren't necessarily on the up-and-up.
In "civilized" society this is (for the most part rightly) interpreted as a lack of control. You aren't your libido. It isn't as important in your life as it makes itself out to be. It can be controlled. Don't want to control it? Fine... just be prepared to live with the consequences, and definitely don't come crying to me. I know you... I am you. I have the same inclinations and live in the same modern societies. I just happen to have me under a (even if only slightly) tighter grip.
Last edited:
@A Vestigial Mote I do not doubt the accusations. I am not caught up on all the news, but so far, it appears to me that they are reporting him for seducing them, not for forcing himself upon them.
I don't think this is true and the reason why is that when someone is disciplined in the organization of Jehovah's Witnesses the reason why is never announced to the congregations.
Speak for yerself, bub.
Some of us aren't ruled by it at all.
A Vestigial Mote
Well-Known Member
I get it, but at the same time even that ends up being a gray-ish area when the man in question has what these women might view as "power". I initially had to go look-up this Harvey Weinstein character, and let's face it, his array of "feathers" isn't all that impressive... at all. Just being honest here. With that in mind, it becomes even more likely that he used his position of "power" to jockey these women into bed with him.
Now, there are no laws against it, surely... however his conduct AFTER those instances where he was successful was probably terrible, and the women probably immediately admitted to themselves that they had only slept with him (or let him do whatever) because of who he was socially and industrially. And then there he is, probably reminding them whenever he sees them of "that time", when the women no longer want anything to do with him. Making comments, possibly even being grabby - used to getting what he wants because he's "Harvey Weinstein!" So he thinks he matters, probably even thinks these women still want something from him - or likes to pretend.
Again, I get it. I am a guy too... do you think I haven't had impulses to do these sorts of inappropriate things? Do you think I have never acted on them? Of course I have, and each time I learned what it was that had me playing the role of social pariah so that I might avoid facing it again. Some of us just don't learn as well as others. It's sort of like paying attention in class. I don't know this Harvey Weinstein, and yet I do - because he is a man, and I am a man. Any evidence and witness testimonies need to speak for themselves, obviously, and I am not advocating that he should be crucified because "he's a man". But (and this is probably an extremely unpopular position to take) I feel that whenever multiple, disparate women come forward accusing a man of some sexually-related misconduct that the weight of those testimonies is multiplicative by default.
A Vestigial Mote
Well-Known Member
Eh, doesn't at all mean that none are. Obviously. Extremely obviously. As in... well, duh.
Oh... and congratulations. Your mother must be so proud.
She's dead.
Grandliseur
Well-Known Member
After I saw you post, I googled him and JWs. I see no connection in my small search.
Can you provide me with a link for this connection? Just curious.
A Vestigial Mote
Well-Known Member
Sorry to hear that. My other comments still stand.
Yeah, I'm perplexed, too. What does Weinstein have to do with the Jehovah's Witnesses?
Grandliseur
Well-Known Member
Hit and miss?!
What's more interesting is Weinstein's relationship with Hollywood liberals, & particularly
the Democratic Party he financially supported. This went on a long time as an open secret
in the business. (It differs from someone like Bill Cosby, who managed to keep his assaults
quiet.) It looks like tacit approval for his behavior.
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
Poor Harvey Weinstein? Seriously? Heck, even the Obama's and Hillary have now come out against this goon. It's not about sex. It's about using his power to abuse beautiful women who otherwise wouldn't pay him the slightest attention. You have seen pictures of the man, right? He isn't much to look at. More like a beer guzzling slob than anything. He is extremely powerful and can make or break a young actress much like you would flick away a fly. Forgive me if I don't have an iota of sympathy for him.
I don't have the slightest idea either. Nobody really cares what JW's think or do in their own tiny circle of influence.
I am sorry. The connection is in my mind. But, it seems to me that every connection had to start somewhere.
I am contrasting being a man in the congregation of JWs and being like Weinstein.
The Jehovah's Witnesses are taught that they are responsible in each one's own way for the souls of every other JW. It is the reason why they still go door-to-door with their "good news".
So, it is very rare that one victim will ever know about another victim so it almost always is a he-said -she-said problem. What I mean is that if someone of JWs is victimized, he or she will not know about anyone else who was victimized by the same person.
No, not seriously. LOL