She Said

• 小梨酥

  2023-03-10
  At 3:33 p.m., McCraw forwarded the reporters a copy of the reply he had just sent to Harder, just three paragraphs long. To the eighteen pages of complaints about journalistic technique, McCraw had a simple answer: Any notion that we have dealt unfairly with Mr. Weinstein is simply false, and you can be sure that any article we do will meet our customary standards for accuracy and fairness.
• 小梨酥

  2023-02-06
  The United States had a system for muting sexual harassment claims, which often enable the harassers instead of stopping them. Women routinely signed away the right to talk about their own experiences. Harassers often continued onward, finding fresh ground on which to commit the same offenses. The settlements and confidentiality agreements were almost never examined in law school classrooms or open court. This was why the public had never really understood that this was happening.
• 小梨酥

  2023-02-06
  Tomei shared a theory: Actresses and the public were stuck in a cycle of mutual misperception. From very young ages, girls were taught to admire and model themselves on the fantasy women onscreen. That made many of them want to become actresses themselves. The lucky ones who made it could never really describe the harassment or the punishing physical standards; that would be self-sabotage. So the cycle continued, with the next generation of girls growing up with Hollywood dreams and little understanding that the industry could mistreat them too.
• 呜ang

  2023-01-15
  Besides, her feeling of having been somehow at fault had never lifted. (That was why she had told Jodi only an abbreviated version of the story.) She could never speak out, she had told Jodi, because she was too afraid ofbeing judged for not running away.Madden was certain that Weinstein had put her old colleague up to the calls. She was direct with Lubell. Yes, Weinstein had harassed her. No, she could not provide any assurance that she wouldn’t speak. In fact, she was outraged by the attempt to silence her. That’s why she had taken Jodi’s first call.
• 夭夭

  2020-02-05
  No one could ever predict how speaking out would go. Forecasting was futile. Once a story was publicly told for the first time, there was no telling what might happen, who might read it, or what others might echo, add, or disagree with. There was no guarantee of affirmation or impact. The results could be wrenching, empowering, or both.But this was what everyone in the room, and more people beyond it,now understood: If the story was not shared, nothing would change. Problems that are not seen cannot be addressed. In our world of journalism, the story was the end, the result, the final product. But in the world at large, the emergence of new information was just the beginning—of conversation, action, change.
• ZZ

  2019-10-31
  No one could ever predict how speaking out would go. Forecasting was futile. Once a story was publicly told for the first time, there was no telling what might happen, who might read it, or what others might echo, add, or disagree with. There was no guarantee of affirmation or impact. The results could be wrenching, empowering, or both.But this is what everyone in the kroom, and more people beyond it, now understood: If the story was not shared, nothing would change. Probablems that are not seen cannot be addressed. In our world of journalism, the story was the end, the result, the final product. But in the world at large, the emergency of new information was just the beginning - of conversation, action, change.
• ZZ

  2019-10-27
  In each industry, harassment had its own particular sociology. In restaurants, liquor was ominpresent at the workplace, eroding judgement and loosening inhibitions, and managers were often loath to confront customers who got out of line. Silicon Valeey was filled with young men who got rich overnight and felt accountable to no one. In shipyards, construction sites, and other traditionally male workplaces, men sometimes tried to drive out women by putting them in physical danger.the language of the deals made them look less like aboveboard legal transactions and more like cover-ups. The agreements included one restrictive clause after another. The women were obliged to turn over all their evidence - audio recordings, diaries, emails, backup files, any other shred of proof - to ... and his ...
• 呜ang

  2023-01-15
  Though the two women had worked alongside one another in the London office, they had never shared their painful stories with each other. Both women were isolated; no one could see the whole picture. It was tempting to daydream about bringing all of the alleged Weinstein victims together somehow, to show them that they had each been part of something larger. But that would be perilous, even with their permission, for the reporters as well as the women. One source could not know who the others were. Anxiety was contagious, the reporters knew. One woman could talk the rest out of participating. One leak could compromise everything.
• ZZ

  2019-10-30
  The Weinstein story was a solvent for secrecy, pushing women all over the world to speak up about similar experiences. The name Harvey Weinstein came to mean an argument for addressing misconduct, lest it go unchecked for decades, an example of how less-severe transgressions could lead to more seriuos ones. An emerging consensus that speaking up about sexual harassment and abuse was admirable, not shameful or disloyal. A cautionary tale about how that kind of behavior could become a grave risk for employers. Most of all, it marked an emerging agreement that Weinstein-like conduct was unequivocally wrong and should not be tolerated.That story was based entirely on one incident, recounted by an anonymous accuser, hghlighting another dilemma: Though many publications continued to publish exp...