Hollywood enabled more sexual harassment
“The Big Bang Theory” is one of television’s most successful comedies. But given the hammering actress Mayim Bialik (Sheldon’s girlfriend) received for her oped on the Harvey Weinstein scandal, it’s clear the laughs stop on the set.
Bialik stated that a woman’s appearance, such as revealing clothes, might be a factor as to why some are sexually harassed. For that, she came under blistering attack from many in Hollywood. But to anyone with half a brain (which disqualifies most of Tinseltown), it was obvious Bialik wasn’t blaming victims. No matter how provocative a woman dresses, that doesn’t give anyone the “right” to harass her.
Maybe it’s wishful thinking, but a little common sense should go a long way.
If a well-dressed person strolls through a crime-infested neighborhood, he’s going to get robbed. Does his appearance legitimatize the attacker? Obviously not. But stupidity invites aggression. Sure, in theory, you should be able to walk anywhere without fear. But in the real world, needlessly putting yourself into that harmful situation would be met with a near-universal response of “that guy got what was coming to him.”
So if making smart decisions mitigates risk, why does the same not apply for sexual harassment? Bialik was simply trying to say that, in some cases, dressing a bit more conservatively would possibly lessen harassment. It won’t end it, because nothing is absolute, and there are many other factors, but it’s a lesson worth remembering.
This column’s readers know that no subject, no matter how “radioactive,” is off limits. Opining on sexual harassment, where it’s inevitable some will be infuriated, is no different. But setting the record straight is always necessary. Let’s look at the situation regarding Weinstein and others, so that we can learn.
1) You would think an issue as serious as sexual harassment could not be politicized. Yet that’s exactly the case. Some on the right are delighted that Harvey, a Hollywood liberal with deep ties to Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party, has been grabbing headlines (among other things). Since when did sexual harassment become something both sides use for political gain? That’s repulsive and an affront to victims.
To illustrate that such behavior is not rooted in political ideology, let’s not forget two other prominent harassers from the other side of the spectrum (in whose downfalls the left reveled).
Roger Ailes, who built Fox News into the nation’s most powerful network, was fired last year after an employee took him on for his misconduct — an act of courage which ultimately revealed Ailes’ very long history of harassing women.
That spectacular fall from grace was followed by the dumping of longtime Fox commentator Bill O’Reilly. It was bad enough that O’Reilly harassed, but doing so after years of self-righteously holding himself to a higher standard, and blasting the left as hypocrites, takes the cake.
And yet O’Reilly had the gall to wallow in self-pity during recent interviews, stating: “It’s horrible what I went through” and “my conscience is clear,” while saying he didn’t mistreat anyone. Sure he didn’t. And if you believe that, you also believe in the tooth fairy. All of those settlements, including the whopping $32 million O’Reilly paid out of his own pocket to a Fox legal analyst, didn’t occur because nothing happened. And it didn’t make O’Reilly the victim, the result of his enemies’ “politically and financially motivated” efforts to keep him off the air.
Two points:
A)If this were a grand conspiracy, and no sexual harassment occurred, then O’Reilly should never have settled since, by definition, he would have been the innocent victim of blackmail and extortion.
B) What could have possibly merited a $32 million payout — arguably a third of his net worth? That sum is so staggeringly large that it boggles the imagination, in much the same way that O’Reilly claims innocence.
And that zone.
2) The fact that Fox’s Sean Hannity had Bill O’Reilly on his show last month talking politics was ludicrous. Doing so amounted to an endorsement of O’Reilly, elevating the disgraced former host to a platform he didn’t deserve. So much for Hannity being the family-values leader he so adamantly claims to be. And for Hannity to turn around and bash Weinstein (and the Democrats with whom he associated) shows why his credibility is so low.
3) Although some definitions of sexual harassment are vague, common sense dictates what is legitimate harassment: Quid pro quos (offers of jobs or money in exchange for sexual favors), threats, pornographic emails, unwarranted shoulder massages/ kisses, asking women to shower with you and exposing oneself (as Weinstein was alleged to have done, along with other, unprintable things), etc.
Granted, inappropriate behavior was more readily tolerated several decades ago. But that’s no excuse, and it didn’t make it right. We’ve come a long way, demonizing sexual harassment so that it’s not as widespread and accepted.
That said, in certain aspects, the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction. Now, asking a colleague on a date, and offering innocent compliments such as “you look nice today,” or “I like your perfume” are often is the real no-spin reported as harassment. There have even been complaints because of how someone “looked” at another.
That’s ridiculous, and hurts the victims of true harassment. Those “offended” at every word, gesture or look when no ill-will was intended hurts the cause more than helps it.
4) Just as damaging as Weinstein’s alleged misconduct is the cowardice demonstrated by multitudes of Hollywood actresses who have piled on, now that “someone else” outed Harvey (and other directors) as serial
It has to be very difficult for a young woman to experience harassment, particularly when looking to build a career in a difficult industry. But the same celebs, whom we are supposed to fawn over for being so “courageous,” stood by and did absolutely nothing to stop Weinstein after they made it to the big time. In other words, they chose advancing their careers over saying enough is enough to a scumbag.
But they would have been blackballed, we’re told. Wrong. Weinstein was powerful, but not Hollywood Almighty. Sure, there is an “old boys” club among studio execs, but more important to them than “sticking together” is making money. So if a bankable actress had exposed Weinstein, not only would her earning potential as a real-life heroine have increased, but so would the millions for the studio head. Free market at its best.
Yes, many of the actresses were young when Harvey “went to work” on them, but after they harassers. found success, why the continued inaction? They didn’t use their star power for a real cause, instead choosing to stay silent on Weinstein’s activities (despite it being the biggest open secret in Hollywood). And even worse, many demonstrated sheer hypocrisy by praising him on one of the world’s biggest stages: The Academy Awards. Hell, Meryl Streep even referred to him as “God.” That’s courage? So Angelina Jolie, with her massive fortune and unsurpassed star power, couldn’t muster the guts to take on Weinstein? Same for the others, with at least one claiming she was raped. Come on! At what point does making movies take a back seat to doing the right thing?
There are no points for Johnny-come-latelies. Bolstered by the security of their bank accounts, these stars could have taken on Weinstein, but didn’t. Yet many women in abusive relationships, who don’t have the luxury of financial security, still make the hardest of calls by doing something about their situation, despite facing massive uncertainty. They are the true heroines.
Bottom line: Hollywood’s elite leading ladies sent the message to today’s young girls that dignity is not worth fighting for, so they should “just take it.”
By staying silent, they placed other women in harm’s way with a known serial predator. And no amount of celebrity or fortune can excuse that selfish decision. Fear is nothing to be ashamed of; it’s how we face that fear that makes for courage.
Let’s hope that others will show more strength than those in Hollywood who allowed Harvey Weinstein to operate his own version of the Big Bang theory.