Morrissey Central: "You Must Please Remember" (February 8, 2020)

Comments

A
Morrissey also said as an argument in support of Harvey Weinstein ....

"Those people (women) knew exactly what would happen, and they played along. Afterwards they were embarrassed or they didn't enjoy it. And then they turn it around and say: 'I was attacked, I was surprised, I was pulled into the room.' But if everything went well, and it helped them to a big career, they wouldn't be talking about it.”

Morrissey the 'feminist' essentially claiming the women got what they deserved.

Some women (people in general) may use sex as route to a better career. However, I genuinely doubt any of them would allow themselves to be brutalised and/or raped because it might lead to a part in a film. Morrissey on the other hand ....

This is the point were a good number of female Morrissey fans said "no!" and returned their fan club memberships.
In fairness, it is only coming out now in Weinsteins trial how he did help womens careers who consented to his advances but also how he could turn violent towards others when it suited him. Some of them knew this system of coercion was wrong but went along with it in order to have a career in the first place. Going to someones hotel room, which is what Morrissey was talking about, you would have to be very naive not to think something was expected of you.
Some women did play along to advance their careers, and some like Juilanna Margulies had already had a similar encounter with Steven Segal in his hotel room in her early career. She knew to bring her agent along when Weinstein made similar arrangements years later, and got the door slammed in her face, and of course, never got the part, hence her TV career. Some of them didn't talk about it for years until others did first, and they did have the big career. so that is true. Pointing that out does not mean they deserved it, or that this excuses Weinsteins behaviour .
Weinstein seems to have been an open secret like a lot of others similar to him in Hollywood , the extent of his violence towards the numbers of women has only come to light AFTER that interview with Morrissey happened. He's only the tip of the iceberg and nobody is talking about all the household names who have done similar and worse to children and young actors and actresses .
 
A
Some women (people in general) may use sex as route to a better career. However, I genuinely doubt any of them would allow themselves to be brutalised and/or raped because it might lead to a part in a film. Morrissey on the other hand ....
.
"Some women may use sex as a route....." - And, There lies the problem
"I genuinely doubt any of them allow to be brutalized" - Neither does a streetwalker.
"It might lead to a part in a film" - You play with fire, expect to be burned. Sometimes.
"Morrissey on the other hand" - Is stating the (obvious) dilemma
 
A
"Some women may use sex as a route....." - And, There lies the problem
"I genuinely doubt any of them allow to be brutalized" - Neither does a streetwalker.
"It might lead to a part in a film" - You play with fire, expect to be burned. Sometimes.
"Morrissey on the other hand" - Is stating the (obvious) dilemma
This is a perfect example of the blame associated with sex.

Anyone who accepts a salary from someone is in effect prostituting themselves; they are selling a skill or attribute for money. When that skill or attribute is sex then society largely labels it as wrong.

Whether these women attempted to further their careers with sex, or not, is irrelevant. At a certain point in that transaction the women who have come forward felt abused, brutalised and silenced.

To suggest they got what they deserved, to attempt to normalise Weinstein's behaviours is exactly why children, women and men under-present instances of abuse; they will be blamed.

Morrissey, in the same interview, blamed the women, he also blamed the 14 year old boy in his support of Kevin Spacey.

It is a complex matter that is deserving of sensitivity, understanding and legal investigation. Morrissey chose to blame. Why?

I walked.
 
A
Forgive me, ordinarily I would never consider divulging sensitive information about a previous patient, however, in this instance I felt duty bound to protect the medical profession. If I am struck off for my actions so be it.

Eight years ago, I had the misfortune to be presented with one Steven P. Morrissey (from my own interactions with Mr Morrissey it soon became clear that the P. stood for prick).

Mr Morrissey informed me that he had a cancerous mole just under his left eye and that his self-diagnosis had been confirmed by several adoring fans that frequented his sycophantic fan forum. On this basis, and on no other that I could determine, he concluded that a diagnosis of cancerous mole (his ‘medical term’) was indisputable.

Following a thorough examination, it transpired that Mr Morrissey was afflicted by a pimple. A common every day pimple. I explained this clearly to him and was pleased to inform him that at last it seems as though he was experiencing puberty (uncommon in a man in his early 50s).

Mr Morrissey would hear none of it. He became rather angry and abusive (typical of someone going through puberty I might add). He called me a know-nothing quack and insisted that I tell him why he would self-diagnose himself and why his fans would corroborate the diagnosis? On that I had no answer other than possible mental health issues.

Mr Morrissey screamed that this would not be the last I would hear of this. I later became aware that he had a habit of threatening those you did not agree with him. Thankfully, his threat proved impotent.

History, it seems, has a habit of repeating itself and once again Mr Morrissey has cried ‘cancer’. This too has been corroborated by adoring fans (who seems quite intent on the object of their affections having cancer). It seems that while a medical professional has diagnosed Barrett’s Oesophagus Mr Morrissey has translated this as cancer and wasted no time fawning in front of TV cameras in the hope that it would illicit sympathy. This behaviour seems at odds with a man who claims to be private, wishes no press intrusion but, yet, here he is disclosing a cancer diagnosis on a worldwide television show.

At this juncture I refer you to my earlier statement of “possible mental health issues”. I posit that Mr Morrissey may in fact be ill and may suffer from a chronic combination of Munchausen's Syndrome and Narcissistic Personality Disorder. I provide these diagnoses based on the short time I spent with him and on details I have since read of his continuing behaviours. I fully expect it to be challenged by Mr Morrissey and the adoring fans who continue to support Mr Morrissey in his delusions.
:laughing:AT LAST, THE TRUTH! :rofl:
:bow::bow::bow::bow::bow::bow:
 
A
Some women (people in general) may use sex as route to a better career. However, I genuinely doubt any of them would allow themselves to be brutalised and/or raped because it might lead to a part in a film. Morrissey on the other hand ....
.

You said so yourself, that some women would use sex , " some women may use sex as route" to help their career , which was, basically, what Morrissey has been saying all along. The fact is if you're pimping yourself or are allowed to be pimped, for your self-interest, you're putting yourself in a very precarious situation; Hoping the outcome will be as you so desire. When such arrangement lead to a rape or sexual assault, and You've said some women choose this "route", would You, then, be condoning the rape itself, Or were you merely asking how & why this could have happened? I wouldn't think You were taking sides on Weinstein behalf, and nether was Morrissey. Presenting a different angle on a subject is not taking sides; it encourages discussion by challenging conventional PC thinking.

" Those people knew exactly what would happen [when they went up to Weinstein's hotel room], and they played along,” he said. “Afterwards they were embarrassed or they didn't enjoy it. And then they turn it around and say: 'I was attacked, I was surprised, I was pulled into the room.' But if everything went well, and it helped them to a big career, they wouldn't be talking about it."

"I hate rape, I hate assault, I hate people being forced into a sexual situation,” . “But in quite a few cases, you look at the situation and think that the people being described as victims are simply disappointed. In the whole history of rock 'n' roll there've been musicians who've slept with groupies. If you go through the history, almost everyone is guilty of sleeping with minors. Why don't we throw everyone in jail?”

On Kevin Spacey's case: "You have to ask, where were the boy's parents. You ask yourself, if the boy didn't know what could happened."
 
A
You said so yourself, that some women would use sex , " some women may use sex as route" to help their career , which was, basically, what Morrissey has been saying all along. The fact is if you're pimping yourself or are allowed to be pimped, for your self-interest, you're putting yourself in a very precarious situation; Hoping the outcome will be as you so desire. When such arrangement lead to a rape or sexual assault, and You've said some women choose this "route", would You, then, be condoning the rape itself, Or were you merely asking how & why this could have happened? I wouldn't think You were taking sides on Weinstein behalf, and nether was Morrissey. Presenting a different angle on a subject is not taking sides; it encourages discussion by challenging conventional PC thinking.

" Those people knew exactly what would happen [when they went up to Weinstein's hotel room], and they played along,” he said. “Afterwards they were embarrassed or they didn't enjoy it. And then they turn it around and say: 'I was attacked, I was surprised, I was pulled into the room.' But if everything went well, and it helped them to a big career, they wouldn't be talking about it."

"I hate rape, I hate assault, I hate people being forced into a sexual situation,” . “But in quite a few cases, you look at the situation and think that the people being described as victims are simply disappointed. In the whole history of rock 'n' roll there've been musicians who've slept with groupies. If you go through the history, almost everyone is guilty of sleeping with minors. Why don't we throw everyone in jail?”

On Kevin Spacey's case: "You have to ask, where were the boy's parents. You ask yourself, if the boy didn't know what could happened."
You've just repeated your blame statement. Your repetition and persistence technique has fallen flat.

As far as you and Morrissey are concerned abused people deserve it. They asked for it. It's their fault. It's little wonder Morrissey's stock is so low.
 
A
You've just repeated your blame statement. Your repetition and persistence technique has fallen flat.

As far as you and Morrissey are concerned abused people deserve it. They asked for it. It's their fault. It's little wonder Morrissey's stock is so low.

The only thing repetitive and persistence is your need to continue wagging your finger-shaming at Morrissey, who brought up many interesting points about these cases. The same points that a Weinstein jury is now weighing upon. Being open-minded, questioning what happened, is integral in a judicial system.
It doesn't take a lot to understand this, that pondering, asking why something is, constitutes an intelligent discourse.

Like asking why a non-fan, like yourself, insist on trolling/following a Morrissey fan forum.
 
A
As fake as they come and Kirk never knew about Moz and why should he?

Is Sam one of the worst cases of pathological liars the world has ever seen?

He'll come out as a serial killer next claiming to be behind all the murders of the world in the past 10 years.

"I was bored and needed a hobby".
 
A
Anyone who accepts a salary from someone is in effect prostituting themselves; they are selling a skill or attribute for money..


"Anyone who accepts a salary from someone is in effect prostituting themselves;" o_O:eek::crazy:

Blimey, we should all be arrested :lbf:
 
A
You Must Please Remember ...

The reported sexual abuse of women and children at the hands of Weinstein and Spacey is not a platform for a pop singer to abuse them further with his assertion that they invited or colluded with the abusers.
 
A
You Must Please Remember ...

The reported sexual abuse of women and children at the hands of Weinstein and Spacey is not a platform for a pop singer to abuse them further with his assertion that they invited or colluded with the abusers.
You Must Please Remember ...
That a reported sexual abuse should be thoroughly investigated to determine accountability, from that of the accused and the accuser. That by Not doing so, is injust and undermines the judiciary process. That anyone presenting an intelligent point of view, such as that of a pop singer, should be respected for broadening our intellect. And, finally, That mindless & nonsensical condemnation has no place amongst critical thinking.
 
A
You Must Please Remember ...
That a reported sexual abuse should be thoroughly investigated to determine accountability, from that of the accused and the accuser. That by Not doing so, is injust and undermines the judiciary process. That anyone presenting an intelligent point of view, such as that of a pop singer, should be respected for broadening our intellect. And, finally, That mindless & nonsensical condemnation has no place amongst critical thinking.
First and second sentences. Those very points were made by me quite some time ago. Do keep up.

From there on in your 'argument' descends into the realm of fantasy.

How is Morrissey broadening 'your' intellect? If you have multiple personalities, and have been diagnosed as such, I'll accept 'our'.

As for your last sentence ... do you understand it? What Morrissey spewed was not 'critical thinking' but his own subjective point of view. It was mindless, non sensical condemnation of victims of abuse without substantive evidence to validate it.
 
A
First and second sentences. Those very points were made by me quite some time ago. Do keep up.

From there on in your 'argument' descends into the realm of fantasy.

How is Morrissey broadening 'your' intellect? If you have multiple personalities, and have been diagnosed as such, I'll accept 'our'.

As for your last sentence ... do you understand it? What Morrissey spewed was not 'critical thinking' but his own subjective point of view. It was mindless, non sensical condemnation of victims of abuse without substantive evidence to validate it.



You identified the accuser(s) as "Victims of abuse", succinctly calling the accused, "abuser", in another post, Yet, The Weinstein trial isn't over and A verdict has not been reached. This is why the court of public opinion never results in a fair trial, because of your kind of affirmations,, and With your mindset, you'll be removed from any jury selection. As a celebrity,made privy to the Hollywood culture, and how some scenarios can be played out, Morrissey's perspective would be of some interest. His statements on Weinstein)s case centered on consensuality, what can and does occur, in the industry's dark side. However, if a non-consensual act, a rape, sexual assault, has been legally determined, I can ,with the upmost confidence, say that he would NOT be "blaming" the victim, "abusing" the victim, or sympathizing with the guilty party, as you've put it. Morrissey has made it loud and clear that non-consensual, forced sexual acts, such as rape, sexual assault is disgusting and repugnant.
 
A
.... Morrissey has made it loud and clear that non-consensual, forced sexual acts, such as rape, sexual assault is disgusting and repugnant.
He has more or less used those terms in the same interview, I believe.

If these acts are so disgusting and repugnant to him why did he choose to use blaming language both with the women involved and the young boy? When the women and the boy reported alleged instances of sexual abuse this in effect means that they did not believe it to be consensual and that they believed it to be forced or coercive.

Morrissey's words demeans the experience of these alleged victims and does nothing to support other alleged victims of sexual abuse coming forward.

Here, as with many other matters, Morrissey speaks then dutifully contradicts himself. He is a baffoon.
 
A
He has more or less used those terms in the same interview, I believe.

If these acts are so disgusting and repugnant to him why did he choose to use blaming language both with the women involved and the young boy? When the women and the boy reported alleged instances of sexual abuse this in effect means that they did not believe it to be consensual and that they believed it to be forced or coercive.

Morrissey's words demeans the experience of these alleged victims and does nothing to support other alleged victims of sexual abuse coming forward.

Here, as with many other matters, Morrissey speaks then dutifully contradicts himself. He is a baffoon.
Morrissey dare speaks the truth about Hollywood's seedy side, the consensual sex (with benefits) and the types of arrangements/relationships, that has been going on for ages. For some, his comments don't go over well, insinuating that he was blaming victims, but, rationally speaking, Can he be blaming a victim, if nether he or the public knows who was victimized, the accuser or the accused, as the Weinstein case is being trialed, as we speak. If it's suggested that he is using blame language on the accuser, then, it is blaming the accused, without any presumptuous of innocence. The two wrongs don't make it a right. Since his comments was about a person's knowingness and willingness to act (the consensuality), the "disappointment " he states, which some consider as the blame, would not be referring to rape, but to not receiving the benefit, in a mutually beneficial (consensual) sexual arrangement. Like a movie role or a promotion that didn't happen. If a crime did occur, a non-consensual, a rape/assault, we are made aware that Morrissey abhors these forced acts. As such, I don't see a contradiction in making these distinctions. For the most part, his statements provide a jarring look into an industry. By him or anyone, bringing the predatory aspects of Hollywood culture to light, it may help, God willing, any of the unwillingly, caught in the game of manipulation, to blame the prevalence of it all, and not oneself. This, some may find comforting.
 
A
Morrissey dare speaks the truth about Hollywood's seedy side, the consensual sex (with benefits) and the types of arrangements/relationships, that has been going on for ages. For some, his comments don't go over well, insinuating that he was blaming victims, but, rationally speaking, Can he be blaming a victim, if nether he or the public knows who was victimized, the accuser or the accused, as the Weinstein case is being trialed, as we speak. If it's suggested that he is using blame language on the accuser, then, it is blaming the accused, without any presumptuous of innocence. The two wrongs don't make it a right. Since his comments was about a person's knowingness and willingness to act (the consensuality), the "disappointment " he states, which some consider as the blame, would not be referring to rape, but to not receiving the benefit, in a mutually beneficial (consensual) sexual arrangement. Like a movie role or a promotion that didn't happen. If a crime did occur, a non-consensual, a rape/assault, we are made aware that Morrissey abhors these forced acts. As such, I don't see a contradiction in making these distinctions. For the most part, his statements provide a jarring look into an industry. By him or anyone, bringing the predatory aspects of Hollywood culture to light, it may help, God willing, any of the unwillingly, caught in the game of manipulation, to blame the prevalence of it all, and not oneself. This, some may find comforting.
"I don't see a contradiction in making these distinctions."

The distinction is the contradiction.

How is it at all possible to, on one hand, claim to find all acts of sexual violence repugnant yet, on the other hand, blame alleged victims of sexual abuse for their part in that sexual violence i.e. they must have known that sex would occur? Even if the alleged victims did know that sex may occur they might, reasonably have expected that sexual interaction to be consensual. Those that have come forward have claimed that it was not consensual and therefore alleged, repugnant acts of sexual violence allegedly took place.

Allegedly, or otherwise, if Morrissey truly believed these acts to be repugnant he would not have so callously blamed the alleged victims.

People discuss Morrissey's race related statements all the time and provide many contradictory statements made by him.

Even his 'friend' James Maker attempted to support Morrissey re: race issues by describing him as a contrarian.

I think his views re: alleged victims of sexual violence are just as alarming as some of his race related comments.
 

Trending Threads

Top Bottom