i've heard this before.

i mean, they did call the group 'pussycat dolls'. if this is true i hope the other members who went through it come out and support Kaya. but if they don't - still the ppl who ran this shit need to be held accountable somehow.

and plus we should legalize prostitution in part to keep ppl from being forced into that life against their will or b/c they want something else and are coerced into prostitution.

http://laist.com/2017/10/16/kaya_jones_pussycat_doll.php

Kaya Jones, a former member of the mid-'00s girl group The Pussycat Dolls, took to Twitter on Friday to allege that the group was an elaborate front for forced sexual encounters, drug use, and emotional abuse:

Jones was a member of the group from 2003 to 2005. The group was initially started in 1995 as a burlesque troupe under the direction of choreographer Robin Antin. During that time, both Christina Applegate and Carmen Electra were among its performers. In 2003, Antin negotiated a record deal with Interscope Geffen A&M Records and morphed the burlesque group into a full music brand. Carmit Bachar, Ashley Roberts, Jessica Sutta and Kimberly Wyatt were the only original members to remain a part of the troupe; Jones was recruited for the new group along with Nicole Scherzinger and Melody Thornton. Jones left the group prior to the release of PCD, their first album.

In response to Jones' accusations, Antin spoke to The Blast and called them "disgusting, ridiculous lies,” adding that Jones is “clearly looking for her 15 minutes.” She also claims Jones was only ever "on a trial" with the group and was never an official member.

Jones' mention of suicide is seemingly a reference to Simone Battle, a performer who was initially part of the re-branded, 2010 version of the Pussycat Dolls. Antin would backtrack on this plan, deciding instead to form a new group called G.R.L with those members. Battle died by suicide in 2014.

Jones concluded her statement by citing the multiple times she had tried to make the story public, only to see it lose traction. Bringing it to the public now, Jones joins a long list of women from creative industries who are stepping forward with allegations of sexual assault and sexual harassment. The outpouring of accusations follow a bombshell New York Times article that detailed producer Harvey Weinstein's decades-long history of alleged sexual abuse.

fuck you.

in how it treats women, but I can't say that its any more so than other industries. but it does seem more blatant or open secret style.

Y'all buy those labels, I was born supreme

'casting couch'.

we put a catchy name on it but decided not to fix it.

we just shrug our shoulders and accept 'thats how it is'.

so yeah...sexual abuse is allowed to operate as an open secret. just don't get caught. if you get sued then settle out of court and get an ironclad non-disclosure agreement. if it's violated go after the victim w/all you've got to teach the rest of them a lesson.

and it's propped up by the ppl who do the bidding of the victimizers. so all of those agents and casting directors and others who make hiring decisions to who honor the request or give weight to the recommendation of a victimizer to not hire the various victims are enabling this systemic rape culture that exists w/in the entertainment industry.

and you're right - it's not just entertainment. but i'm speaking specifically about the 'casting couch' thing. i dunno of another industry that's attached such a catchy name to this horrific practice.

fuck you.

I'm not aware of other names for it used by other business, but others may have co-opted the 'couch' in the their industry too.

its pretty horrible how the victims get so much shit for things they wear, being in the 'wrong place', asking for it, or anything else that blames them instead of the person who committed the crime.

sure there are folks that get falsely accused and that's ugly too. but I wonder how the numbers compare of those that are victimized vs those that are falsely accused.

Y'all buy those labels, I was born supreme

But since rapes are under reported this captures a relatively small number of rape cases. It's clear - rape is the bigger problem.

fuck you.

not in any specific case, but generally speaking.

Should a different standard apply when dealing with sexual assault?

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

Criminal defendants are entitled to a presumption of innocence from judges and juries unless and until the prosecution is found to have met the burden to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt or until the defendant waives this right. Of course this standard should and does apply in courts of law on sexual batteries of all types.

The court of public opinion is not bound to any such standard. As this conversation is occurring outside any court of law the innocence presumption standard is inapplicable.

fuck you.

Many people still apply that standard. Not until it's proven guilty in court per se, however until theres evidence substantial enough that it convinces them.

So basically, if a victim has a claim, many are still waiting for her to 'prove' it. Til then, the assumption is that the accused is innocent.

That can make a victim feel like crap...'like her word isn't enough'.

Some may doubt her claims bc of a ton of bs reasons...others are just applying the innocent until proven guilty standard.

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

fuck you.

It's clear - rape is the bigger
>problem.

Y'all buy those labels, I was born supreme

<--- Big Baller World Order

but it's not okay that various women and men who want gigs in that industry are sometimes raped or harassed in order to get that work. we just treat it like 'oh well' and that allows it to continue.

why are we okay w/this?

fuck you.

to turn a blind eye to how the industry recruits and retains its talent we pay top-dollar for.

Rest In Peace, Bad News Brown

She's presenting it as if it was a feature of being in the group (as opposed to something that just happened to her).

If there is no corroboration from others in the group, what should we do with this info?

I'm not doubting her account, I'm just need more facts before burning my Pussycat Dolls posters.

_______________________________________

What's her angle?

fuck you.

I'm not even saying that she is lying. Just pointing out that people are often way too quick to jump to concrete conclusions before considering the facts.

I usually try to stay silent on these articles because they are so void of information. But a lot of time it works like this. Somebody makes an accusation, article gets published, the accused denies, pitchforks come out, nothing gets resolved

In this case there seems to be a clear path to understanding what happened since she ropes all the group members into the action.
If everyone else in the group comes out and says "I don't know what this lady is talking about", it is easy to conclude that her claims probably are false. On the other hand, corroboration among some group members makes it pretty clear that something fishy was going on.

Pretty easy to get those facts straight first before publishing something like this

_______________________________________

why would they admit it?

They gonna be like "nah, that bish is lying and couldn't sang"

only ones that would admit it are the ones who didn't make it UNLESS someone really has the stones to speak that truth.

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

From the way we examine all other charges/accusations. I understand why, but that goes completely against the justice system we have here.

Our justice system says it's better for a bunch of guilty people to go free than for one innocent to be convicted.

Should that apply to sex assault cases too?

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

Never proved guilty in court.

What's up?

They innocent too, boss?

fuck you.

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

fuck you.

Each cop shooting case needs to be examined on a a case by case basis. Same with sex assault cases. When there's evidence ie video of a shooting of a person not being a threat, it's pretty easy to draw a conclusion.

I don't make judgmentsure on officers without there being some evidence of foul play.

Most assault cases are he said she said.

People tend to feel like an accuser should be believed just bc. You even asked here 'what was somebodys' motive to lie. Ain't it on the accuser to prove their case. Should their word be enough? I don't think so.

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

I won't respond bc you have a typo. That's where this is, right? We being that petty, right?

fuck you.

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

Fuck you, ho.

fuck you.

"Get ready....for your blessing....."

Do we think quid pro quo sex is consensual? Why are we so ambivalent about it?

fuck you.

If there is an implication of physical force, then no its not consensual. But if the woman has a choice, and she makes that decision, I see it as consensual. But harassment nontheless

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

Do the ppl who offer such a false choice and engage in what you know to be harassment bear any responsibility?

fuck you.

I just said that.

Rape? No.

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

You see nothing wrong with that offer bc the applicant doesn't have to accept it and applicant who does accept it is having consensual sex bc they could have rejected the offer to have sex in exchange for hiring.

fuck you.

http://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=13202757&mesg_id=13202757&page=#13202829

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

I'm pretty good at this.

fuck you.

they deserve to be blamed for harassment.

You keep asking or saying that i'm saying they are not culpable like a doofus that can't read or respond in the right place.

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

fuck you.

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

Actually I'm not. You're not right for it. Clients are better off.

fuck you.

and makes it harder for those who don't want to have sex to get XYZ

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

Women who acquiesce to forced sex to get a job are more or less culpable in your mind than those who forced them to have sex against their will to gain something?

fuck you.

https://media.tenor.com/images/d23499613e36ccd708f9dfcde8647d61/tenor.gif

man, just say fuck you hoe and be done with it..

lazy ass questions

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

because its considered to take the least effort of any path to success.

<--- Big Baller World Order

fuck you.

Most cases of quid pro quo sex aren't rape.

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

Most quid pro quo sex cases are rape.

fuck you.

nah.

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

Ain't.
Nobody.
Talking.
About.
Court.

Rape exists without regard for court.

Pass a Bar. Get over yourself. Shit.

fuck you.

after you lose an argument, i know you mad.

Here, i'll end it for you.












K.

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

No one here is talking about court. I have no idea what you're going on about. And now I don't care.

fuck you.

exists in your head. We clearly have different definitions of rape. Assumed we could agree to go by a legal definition since that's your area of expertise but nope, you prefer to stick to the one thats in your head.


Probably why you disagree with niggas so much smh.

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

nope.

fuck you.

my part.

You got caught out there talking about a definition of rape that only exists in your head.

No way anyone can have authentic discourse when you are just making up definitions for things.


Plus its very weird.

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

i was right!

fuck you.

>Do we think quid pro quo sex is consensual? Why are we so
>ambivalent about it?

Its a bit bizarre to me that you've got a professional with a certain level of power/responsibility showing such a crazy lapse of judgement that even if we can argue that there's an equivalent/fair exchange of power for sex or whatever..its not their fault its the other person in the scenario?

THEY ARE THE NIGGAS IS SUPPOSED TO BE PROFESSIONAL, LOL.

It's a weird mix of sexism and that "they made it(through hard work) so we can't begrudge them" American bullshit.

There's a reason why when a society (eventually) turns its eyes towards purging corruption the ones in power are the ones who are held accountable.

the ones that get terminated.

If the one making the claim gets terminated, its retaliation aka another lawsuit.

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

Aka, more of a stigma around the water cooler on rumors of Susan's hussy ways as opposed to the Craig who supposedly granted her the favor (you might get the, 'I hope his wife doesn't find out!' lol)

>the ones that get terminated.
>
>If the one making the claim gets terminated, its retaliation
>aka another lawsuit.

If its a case where a dude in power is holding someone's livelihood over their head aka you wanna keep your job this is what you gotta do...yeah i'm with you on that...100% of the blame goes to the guy.


I can see how blame goes both ways in a situation tho where a female 'sleeps' her way to the top so to speak. So yeah, the guy in the position of power should be held to a higher standard, but then you also have those that are envious of how the woman garnered her 'success' in a way that others won't resort to, or don't have the option to. So there's a little disdain/hateration mixed in as well.

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

to abuse their power tho. look at harvey, who's been calling all these shots for years with no real consequences. and kept doing it. folks flock to him even know that he's been scummy.

even with the price he's paying now, he'll still be rich af and can just disappear if he chose to. he has less to lose. he doesn't have to work, but those that he went after most likely still need to work to eat.

Y'all buy those labels, I was born supreme

You can be a cretin and think otherwise. And yes I'm judging you. You're disgusting. And I won't discuss it. Fuck you.

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2017/10/harvey_weinstein_s_biggest_enabler_a_culture_that_says_sexual_harassment.html

fuck you.

how do you see sex to get ahead professionally (in a scenario where the woman is fully comfortable with the arrangement) to be any different than sex workers receiving money for favors? we've seen you advocate for the legalization of the latter (I dont have a stance on that either way)

sure, someone holding a professional opportunity over a woman's head is morally bankrupt. but do you think a woman has more sexual agency and say so in a situation where she's charging for it?

I guess what Im saying is if this woman's account is factual, maybe she processed things as abusive where the other groupmates were fine with doing whatever it took

A woman sleeping with a dude bc he got money and showers her with gifts is quid pro quo sex

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

nobody's using the sex as leverage, it literally is the transaction.

maybe im misreading y'all (and I havent read all the replies) but it seems completely different.

________
http://twitter.com/aehorton
http://instagram.com/aehorton

if you have sex with me, I'll give you this promotion/raise/etc.

The difference is one is the female offering something(taking control, hopefully) vs receiving an offer.

In both, its an exchange for sex for something of value.

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

we're not cool with that being an acceptable hiring procedure, are we?

the sex/money should be independent of the base transaction. whereas in prostitution it is the base transaction.

________
http://twitter.com/aehorton
http://instagram.com/aehorton

wants.

There are levels to it tho...

one is prostitution...where sex is the base transaction bc its being offered by the woman (its whats for sale)

the other extent is a man offering an incentive for a sexual favor.
the sexual favor is whats used to buy whats being offered. I don't distinguish in my mind between the base transaction like you said bc to me its the same transaction, just who is doing the selling.


Middle ground is woman that sleep with men only because of what they can give them (gifts, money, trips) even though there's no explicit arrangement(sometimes)


It all falls under quid pro quo sex to me. Exchanging sexual favors for something of value.

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

but the mechanics are pretty much the same as paying a woman to fuck

i was responding to this line in his post:

"how do you see sex to get ahead professionally (in a scenario where the woman is fully comfortable with the arrangement) to be any different than sex workers receiving money for favors?"

________
http://twitter.com/aehorton
http://instagram.com/aehorton

fuck you.

Let me preface this with: I've worked in HR for 16yrs.

>how do you see sex to get ahead professionally (in a scenario
>where the woman is fully comfortable with the arrangement)

This is her prerogative. If she CHOOSES to accept an advance or initiates an encounter with the intent to do it to advance her career, there's no issue here.

to
>be any different than sex workers receiving money for favors?
>we've seen you advocate for the legalization of the latter (I
>dont have a stance on that either way)

Again, this is an active career 'choice'. No issue here (outside of legality).

>sure, someone holding a professional opportunity over a
>woman's head is morally bankrupt. but do you think a woman has
>more sexual agency and say so in a situation where she's
>charging for it?

It's not only morally bankrupt but it's illegal. In this case, she has no choice. If her manager says 'do this or your fired', to not do it is career suicide. Who wants to be faced with 'suck a d*ck or get fired'? Turn the tables. Your male boss says that to you, you think you have agency in the decision? You like your job otherwise, had no intent to leave and it supports your way of life and possibly family. How is that a choice? A female boss says it but you're happily married. How's that gonna fly? You going home with the "but babe, she said if I didn't smash we couldn't pay the mortgage!"

And quid pro quo goes both ways. "Do this and you'll be rewarded" is just as bad and can have negative consequences as well. If she declines, it usually won't end there. It's a power play and now that she's not on board, her job/status/opportunity is at risk at all times. If she does it, it creates an expectation of future obligation as well. None of it is right, nor legal, even if the woman agrees to go along.

>I guess what Im saying is if this woman's account is factual,
>maybe she processed things as abusive where the other
>groupmates were fine with doing whatever it took

But the accuser would be correct. The others would be more morally ambiguous to the activity but by law still have a claim. Unless you're in the pron industry, no one should have to suck d*ck to further their careers.

____________

>This is her prerogative. If she CHOOSES to accept an advance or initiates an encounter with the intent to do it to advance her career, there's no issue here.


>And quid pro quo goes both ways. "Do this and you'll be rewarded" is just as bad and can have negative consequences as well. If she declines, it usually won't end there. It's a power play and now that she's not on board, her job/status/opportunity is at risk at all times. If she does it, it creates an expectation of future obligation as well. None of it is right, nor legal, even if the woman agrees to go along.


A lot of times a woman can be on board in the moment and feel like crap the next day, 6months later, 12 months later etc.

In those situations is there an issue or nah?

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

that's quid pro quo and illegal. And yes, even if she does it, she has a claim.

The defense is always "I felt like I had no choice or I'd be fired". No matter what reward she gets. And if a dude is sleazy enough to ask, it won't be 1 time thing.

____________

And an employee taking it upon themselves to roll the dice and see what happens...got it.

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

>It's not only morally bankrupt but it's illegal. In this
>case, she has no choice. If her manager says 'do this or your
>fired', to not do it is career suicide. Who wants to be faced
>with 'suck a d*ck or get fired'?

Plenty of Harvey Weinstein's victims didnt welcome/accept his advances while staying silent


Turn the tables. Your male
>boss says that to you, you think you have agency in the
>decision? You like your job otherwise, had no intent to leave
>and it supports your way of life and possibly family. How is
>that a choice? A female boss says it but you're happily
>married. How's that gonna fly? You going home with the "but
>babe, she said if I didn't smash we couldn't pay the
>mortgage!"

corporate HR prevents this. sadly things probably aren't set up this way in entertainment

if the goal is to get hired on __.

they have a casting meeting/audition set up w/the producer of __.

producer says 'suck my dick or else you're not hired'.

choice?

she chose already - she wants to get hired on ___.

to get hired she has to suck dick.

what in the entire fuck is that?

she shouldn't have to make a 'choice' like that to get hired on ___.

to say she has a choice - she can just walk away isn't fair. we can't just end the analysis there.

b/c her choice not to suck dick for that gig doesn't just end there.

she decides that __ didn't work out b/c she won't suck dick for it.

so she wants to audition for ________ instead.

she gets the meeting.

a different producer. who heard from the __ producer that she refused to suck dick to get the gig.

so now it's 'she thinks she's too good' or 'she's stuck up' or 'she's frigid'.

the choice - 'suck dick or else you're not hired'. again.

*sigh*

choice?

okay.

no.

fine.

she's not hired.

she wants to audition for ____________________ instead.

she doesn't even get the meeting.

b/c the 2 producers have talked to each other about her refusals.

damn.

she goes to her agent for help. the agent has talked to all 3 producers. the agent tells her 'look, honey. that's how the business works. either you're gonna suck dick or you'll never get what you want.'

choice, huh?

okay.

fuck you.

this power dynamic is why it's nothing like simple prostitution to me.

________
http://twitter.com/aehorton
http://instagram.com/aehorton

Im 100% not implying things should be this way or that Im not disturbed by it

but we dont make the rules in Hollywood and I dont even think Harvey Weinstein's downfall will be enough to change the rules

I saw enough I didnt like interning in the music business to decide pursuing it wasnt for me

there are lots of ways to make a living in this world that dont include subjecting yourself as prey for scumbags

women dont deserve to be treated this way, but by the same token you know what you're signing up for, and if you dont, you can always say to hell with that path

with things weinstein wanted, we're hearing of women that made a choice NOT to.

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

how satisfied are they?

are they fulfilled?

how do they feel about the fact that they were presented w/that 'choice'?

how do we feel about it? do we think that's fair?

the ones who gave up on their dream to be an actor b/c they didn't wanna play that game...is that their happily ever after? roll the credits?

ending the analysis at the 'choice' is pretty callous and only tells about half of the story if even that much.

if we have empathy for these women i think we can see beyond the 'choice' they made. if we have empathy we listen to them and don't just end it w/the 'choice'.

fuck you.

decisions you make have consequences. They are dealing with the consequences of their decisions. Some decided that their career chances were more important than their morals. Others didn't.

I salute those that stood by their morals and got out.

I empathize with any in that situation. (i've been put in situations where i had to choose between my morals and something else i wanted)

But they all had a choice and they made it.

Except those that were raped, touched without consent, exposed to etc

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

and when you go beyond the choice you focus on the women who were presented w/the non-choice and that's it.

nothing for the men who put them in that position.

nothing about the various ways the men who behaved so awfully are supported and enabled.

'that's the way things are'

shoulder shrug.

as if the women were the only ppl involved in this. b/c the other side - the men who made the offer w/the non-choice are 'things'.

and that's the way those 'things' are.

they can't be changed. they've been this way and will be this way.

'things'. not men. w/agency. and power. to decide to be the way they are. or decide otherwise.

'things'.

you know who made a choice in these scenarios?

the men making the hiring decisions. they decided to be awful. they didn't have to be.

fuck you.

the dudes that give those choices are slimebuckets. Most of us here agree on that. I've never said anything contrary.

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

you argue the technical points and SoWhat is arguing big picture.

you reply directly to his words and he's replying to the part of society who often expresses similar sentiments to what you posted.

i think your brains are just wired differently.

________
http://twitter.com/aehorton
http://instagram.com/aehorton

Nigga arguing with me about viewpoints I ain't express.

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

________
http://twitter.com/aehorton
http://instagram.com/aehorton

are you fighting against. I'm not. He takes it 12 steps further than what most people actually say.

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.