Andrew Kreisberg susspended from The Flash following accusations of sexual harrassment
- Thread starter JD
- Start date
Yes? But only insofar as I knew nothing about him, at all, other than a vague familiarity with his name in comics credits.
The larger issue of these incidents emerging now is, beyond being way overdue, fascinating for what it reveals about the fragility of privilege as a justification for behaviour. Privilege itself isn’t fragile but these incidents are revealing a weakness in the armour—one I thought would follow from Trump’s comments last year (the grabbing with impunity). While he seems to have escaped repercussions for such acts, perhaps the very outrage of his escape from consequences served as a catalyst for this current wave of coming forward (Trump may well remain too powerful at the moment but Weinstein was a an investigative journalism coup and may serve as a “pivot point” going forward).
I only hope things don’t recede and get forgotten as the “next news story” grabs everyone’ attention.
The larger issue of these incidents emerging now is, beyond being way overdue, fascinating for what it reveals about the fragility of privilege as a justification for behaviour. Privilege itself isn’t fragile but these incidents are revealing a weakness in the armour—one I thought would follow from Trump’s comments last year (the grabbing with impunity). While he seems to have escaped repercussions for such acts, perhaps the very outrage of his escape from consequences served as a catalyst for this current wave of coming forward (Trump may well remain too powerful at the moment but Weinstein was a an investigative journalism coup and may serve as a “pivot point” going forward).
I only hope things don’t recede and get forgotten as the “next news story” grabs everyone’ attention.
One thing I have learned over the years from reading and conversing with people in Hollywood -- it's full of vindictive assholes (and perverts -- but we know this now largely). I'd never put it above some vindictive or just plain evil people or one sex or another to lay false claims against somebody to destroy them for what ever reason. I just know too much.
^ I did acknowledge that there would be the very odd false accusation.
Nor should you put it above "just plain evil" people in power to use that power to abuse those under them. If there are bad people at all levels, the ones in a position to punch down are going to do a lot more damage, and the ones they victimize are going to be under a lot of pressure not to come forward. The more powerful are in an easier position to attack than the less powerful, so it stands to reason that executives abusing their underlings will happen a whole lot more often than underlings trying to "destroy" executives for some reason. We're still probably only hearing about a fraction of the abuses that have actually happened.
Of course everyone's entitled to the presumption of innocence. But surely that applies to the accusers as well as the accused. Too often, the presumption of the innocence of the powerful is used as an excuse to presume the guilt of those who call them to account, to vilify them and drag them through the mud, and that's abusing the principle.
Logically, a charge that comes from multiple, unconnected sources who corroborate each other is going to be more credible than one that comes from a single, uncorroborated source. And nearly all the charges coming out lately seem to fall in the former category, the exception being the claim that was made recently against George Takei.
Other than Eddie, who was used to just getting a slap on the wrist?
None of this surprises me. Hollywood be Hollywoodin'.
I'm sure it's quite pervasive outside of Hollywood as well. Celeb "indiscretions" just get more press.
Did we ever learn the truth about the Michael Jackson allegations, btw?
The one thing that amazes me with this whole situation is just how quickly the floodgates seem to have opened. It seems like every few days new accusations are coming out. It will be interesting to see how much is actually done about all of this.
I have to admit though, I was a bit surprised about Kreisberg, he's seemed like a pretty decent guy in most of the interviews and things I've seen and read. I guess this just shows that it isn't always easy tell what a person is really like behind closed doors.
Aside from what you've already seen: job loss, potential police investigations, and the basic freedom for victims to come forward, and I expect entertainment companies to try to make grand speeches claiming they have created a UN-eqsue body designed to monitor sexual abuse. On that note....
That's the point--no one should ever be surprised that the industry which has peddled all manner of questionable, and abusive behavior on screen, and practiced it as a way of life is loaded with those of the lowest immoral character. Remember, this is the same industry, where over 100 of its fellows singed the "free Roman Polanski" petition (David Lynch, Martin Scorsese and Johnathan Demme among them and supported by Whoopi Goldberg). The same industry which has been accused of sexualizing children (through the cable arms of Disney, Nickelodeon, etc.), and still celebrate and largely protect Woody Allen by no widespread boycotting of his work (read: still producing his work) and/or condemnation after knowing his criminal acts for decades, and Stephen (Star Trek: The Motion Picture) Collins can admit to molesting children, but again, no widespread condemnation. Sending a loud and clear message that a moral inversion is normal.
This is not a few incidents spread across the years, but a systemic belief / practice in the entertainment business by too many to count or name. No one should be surprised when its employees are exposed for sickening abuses.
That doesn't really surprise me. This kind of abuse has been going on for generations, but women (and sometimes men) who were abused have felt they had to stay silent because they wouldn't be believed, or because the system would ruin them if they tried. So it stands to reason that the first time a major figure in the industry was actually brought down by the charges, the first time the victims actually got justice by standing together, it would embolden others to think that finally, finally they could come forth and tell the stories they've been hiding for years, and have some hope that they'd finally be believed rather than punished. Maybe it started with Bill Cosby, but once someone as powerful as Harvey Weinstein was brought down, that burst the dam, I think. It's safety in numbers.
I think it's also a reaction to the fact that a proudly self-confessed sexual predator is currently sitting in the White House, brazenly getting away with it. That's created a whole new level of outrage, and though removing that particular predator from power is easier said than done, I think it's motivated people to fight harder against the culture and system that enabled someone like him to thrive.
Yeah, that's the thing. Someone can actually be a good person in most respects, and yet have a set of values about how to treat women that makes them predatory. Isaac Asimov was a beloved, charming figure in the science fiction and science writing field, and his constant flirtations and skirt-chasing were seen at the time as an endearing eccentricity and perhaps something of an affectation, but now we've come to realize that he was a serial sexual harasser and had a darker side than we realized. Julius Schwartz was a beloved and highly important figure in comics for decades, a dear friend to many people, both men and some women; but behind closed doors, he was predatory toward young women and treated many aspiring female comics creators as prizes to be conquered rather than talent to nurture, and so he did a lot of damage in addition to all the great things he did for the industry.
Sometimes it's hard to get your head around the idea that a single entity can be both very good and very bad at the same time. We want to put a single label on everyone and everything, to have a clear category to put it in. But sometimes it's not that easy. People are driven by numerous, often conflicting impulses, and that's why people with one incredibly destructive vice can seem like really good people and actually do genuinely good and altruistic things. Those are the cases that are hardest to deal with. It's relatively easy when the person in question is an all-around reprehensible creep. But when it's someone who's done things genuinely worth admiring, like Asimov or Cosby, it can get pretty confusing.
He's one of many executive producers, and he's basically at the senior level where he oversees a bunch of individual showrunners below him. It's a pretty huge operation by this point, with a ton of talented people working on it. Assuming the charges are borne out and he is dismissed, there will probably be promotions from within.
Thank you for the info. I hope they have enough decent people left. 
The shows are coming along quite nicely in my eyes (there are lots of complaints) but they fill a gap in modern tv where "everything" is gritty and dark and here you have shows you can like and have fun with.
The shows are coming along quite nicely in my eyes (there are lots of complaints) but they fill a gap in modern tv where "everything" is gritty and dark and here you have shows you can like and have fun with.
Statements from Benoist, Rickards, and Leigh:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/li...ergirl-boss-accused-sexual-harassment-1057388
(Best just to scroll down to the bottom and read the statements directly.)
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/li...ergirl-boss-accused-sexual-harassment-1057388
(Best just to scroll down to the bottom and read the statements directly.)
Decent statements, though it doesn't really tell us anything about Kreisberg and their experiences with him...
To properly and forcefully deal with the level of entertainment business sexual abuse, ALL sexual abuse must be recognized, and not isolated by gender. This cannot go anywhere with effect unless the cries of those like Corey Feldman (victim of adult men raping boys), Anthony Rapp (Spacey--enough said), Val Kilmer's accuser (striking her in the face & throwing her to the floor during an audition).Terry Crewes (sexual abuse), James Van Der Beek (physical & verbal sexual abuse), and others are all brought to the forefront to 1--admit the existence of, then expose the culture behind it, and 2--treating all abusers as an aberration to human society, not some "misunderstood" person who gets to go to the latest big money retreat for "treatment", when the behavior, desire and actions were all conscious choices. The fight has to be a united front, otherwise you will continue to have a situation where both victims and advocates of sex abuse victims tend to splinter into camps and assumed orders of importance (allowing abusers to be ignored or not taken as seriously), when they are all the end result of a generations-long, industry wide culture of sexual abuse.
You forgot consuming their products like Star Trek TOS or Supergirl or Flash.
I have already stopped watching TOS years ago when I heard what happend to Grace Lee Whitney. Which I learned on this board btw but obviously I was the only to draw this conclusion. Don't forget that this whole forum centers around TV shows that created those "aberrations to human society" in the first place or enabled them to do what they did.
The way to prevent that more "aberrations" can build more money retreats is not to consume anything any further that comes from the cultural industry.
Last edited:
I don't think they're speaking to us, they're speaking to/on behalf of the women who've been victimized. If anything, Benoist sounds a bit regretful, as if she feels she didn't try hard enough to stand up for them before. Although maybe she's just being too hard on herself, just as Supergirl sometimes is. What's impressive about her comment is how "in character" it is. Reading her post, I couldn't help but envision her saying these words as Supergirl. Between her and Gal Gadot's ultimatum about Brett Ratner, it's really cool to see these portrayers of great superheroines living up to their characters.
As for Rickards's statement, I read on CBR that she seems to be implicitly critiquing a rather tone-deaf "not all men" comment Marc Guggenheim made about "reverse sexism."
Similar threads
