Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

'Sexual favours were the norm in music industry'

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 643 posts

Re: 'Sexual favours were the norm in music industry'

#471

Post by the_cat_kittles »

zxcvbn4038 wrote: post #443

It depends on the company. I worked at a large international bank where we had a couple dozen project managers that would travel abroad for 2-6 weeks at a time. We had server set up in a storage closet with a huge porn cache. When the project managers came back to the US we would copy all the porn they had collected to the server, replace the porn on their laptops with new porn from the cache, then send them back abr…

how is it possible to have a 400k per month cocaine habit? was he giving it to his 100 closest friends every day?

Re: 'Sexual favours were the norm in music industry'

#472

Post by skissane »

sokoloff wrote: post #467
skissane wrote: post #458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the girl in question has (later, when she grew up) expressed that she does not wish that Polanski be prosecuted or further punished by the industry. I think Samantha Geimer has been doubly victimised – first by Polanski, then by a legal system which cares more about itself than about the interests and wishes of the victims it is supposed to protect. I think Geimer feels, that as Polanski's victim, she should have s…

I think the individual victim certainly has some interest in the punishment outcomes, but the state also has a proper interest. Neither holds a monopoly. (In particular, was she his only victim? That seems unlikely.)

> I think the individual victim certainly has some interest in the punishment outcomes, but the state also has a proper interest. Neither holds a monopoly

The state holds a monopoly. All the victim gets, is the right to be consulted by the prosecution, but the prosecution is free to ignore the victim's opinion, as they have done repeatedly in this case.

Geimer asked the courts to drop the case, because she was sick of the whole thing and wants it to go away. The court refused, because it isn't about her, she's just the victim: https://apnews.com/article/683568177ab04a7081dad4e3664b13aa

> (In particular, was she his only victim? That seems unlikely.)

The case in question is only about what Roman Polanski did to Samantha Geimer, not about what Roman Polanski did to other people. Indeed, other women have said that Polanski abused them (Valentine Monnier, Charlotte Lewis, Renate Langer, Marianne Barnard). But, this prosecution is only about what Polanski did to Geimer, which I think means Geimer's wishes ought to be respected by the prosecution. If Polanski were to be prosecuted for what he did to one of his other victims, Geimer would have no say in that, and she wouldn't claim she is entitled to any.

Re: 'Sexual favours were the norm in music industry'

#473

Post by apostacy »

mr-wendel wrote: post #302
mathgorges wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for this. These sort-of argument catalogue comments are very helpful in these discussions. And your call out at the bottom is good wisdom :) Edit: this->these

You bet! Now, if you'll allow me to try to present the other side for your consideration: - Virtue signaling is a critical component to personal and social moral growth. Showing where you stand and putting your money where you mouth is necessary to decentralize authority and improve the standards that are "baked" into society. Otherwise you're just appealing to whoever has the biggest stick. - That people misapply a…

> - Virtue signaling is a critical component to personal and social moral growth. Showing where you stand and putting your money where you mouth is necessary to decentralize authority and improve the standards that are "baked" into society. Otherwise you're just appealing to whoever has the biggest stick.

I was under the impression the virtue signalling specifically requires insincerity.

For example, if you inject yourself into a conversation to lecture everyone about what a great ally you are (and you don't even really mean it), that is virtue signaling.

If you try to make it all about yourself, and assert completely risk free opinions that challenge nothing, that is virtue signalling.

Simply sharing and asserting your values doesn't have to be virtue signalling.

> - That people misapply a legitimate action or are overzealous in its application doesn't mean the underlying idea is wrong. The Internet is still quite young and its inviting a global confrontation of how to deal with deeply-seated social problems. Expecting this new-found power to be wielded without making mistakes is unrealistic.

Nobody objects to the underlying idea of witch hunting. If there were actual witches that were using magic powers to poison the town, of course we should have an inquisitor to hunt them down.

This has only ever been a discussion about tactics.

Re: 'Sexual favours were the norm in music industry'

#474

Post by yowlingcat »

the_cat_kittles wrote: post #471
zxcvbn4038 wrote: post #443

It depends on the company. I worked at a large international bank where we had a couple dozen project managers that would travel abroad for 2-6 weeks at a time. We had server set up in a storage closet with a huge porn cache. When the project managers came back to the US we would copy all the porn they had collected to the server, replace the porn on their laptops with new porn from the cache, then send them back abr…

how is it possible to have a 400k per month cocaine habit? was he giving it to his 100 closest friends every day?

You would be surprised at how quickly tolerance builds up once someone gets ahold of the good stuff. Considering that this guy is in Berlin, it's probably not as cheap as it is close to the source. Even so, at $300 an eight ball, that's roughly 44 eight balls a day, or roughly 2-4 an hour depending on how hard he's partying. It certainly is on the heavier side of usage profiles I've heard of.

Re: 'Sexual favours were the norm in music industry'

#475

Post by anonisko »

bjourne wrote: post #192
chiefalchemist wrote: post #12

It's hard to imagine this is only the music industry. Human use sex as a weapon and a tool all the time. True, it might be more useful in the music industry but why would sex as currency only exist there? Where there are humans, there is sex. The obviousness of how that plays out may differ but the underlying theme is universal.

Perhaps because the music industry is so dependent on personal connections and because talent is very subjective? In academia, doctorate students usually do not have to sleep with their supervisors to get their degree.

Sleeping with a professor for academic advantage is definitely not a common trope, so this makes sense. /s

Re: 'Sexual favours were the norm in music industry'

#476

Post by shams93 »

I could have been working in hip hop in the 90s however the label didn't just want production help they also wanted help selling heroin, the industry in the 90s was very unprofessional to say the least, coming from being a fan of Fugazi and other "straight edge" music I was horrified by the prospect of being expected to sell heroin to get into production for the industry.

Re: 'Sexual favours were the norm in music industry'

#477

Post by farfacy »

lanius wrote: post #365

Still is in the K-pop industry.

Not just in Kpop.

"LITTLE MIX claim record bosses ordered them to flirt with men to get ahead in the music industy. The accusations from the quartet come after Simon Cowell confirmed the group have switched to RCA Records. Now the women have alleged they were advised how to behave to carve out chart success following their victory on The X Factor in 2011. Jade Thirlwall claimed: ‘We went to a radio event in America, full of VIPs. Someone from the label said, “Go and flirt with all those important men.” I was like, “F** off. Why have I got to go in and flirt to get my song on the radio?”’ The 25-year-old also alleged the singers were given no input into their own songs because they are women. ‘In the beginning, we were told we shouldn’t be involved in our music videos,’ she said. ‘One producer told us we shouldn’t be writing, we should just be given songs."

Re: 'Sexual favours were the norm in music industry'

#478

Post by jlawson »

klyrs wrote: post #347
jlawson wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Turing wasn't 'canceled' for being gay. He was prosecuted by the government according to the laws of the time, by police. Cancel culture is extra-legal and does not involve the use of laws or police. Cancel culture is also distinct from politicians and infidelity because cancel culture targets non-public individuals . Of course politicians and celebrities were always subject to public opinion; the modern era now mean…

> It's ironic you say casually that "people today are getting canceled for exhibiting intolerance and bigotry", when cancel culture is itself intolerance and bigotry. You've hit Popper's paradox right on the head. Sexism, racism, homophobia, and transphobia are examples of intolerance. Fighting those values, and criticizing/boycotting their champions, is not. This is the bright line between what the right decries as…

You're committing an extremely common mis-representation of what Popper wrote about his paradox.

As Popper wrote, his conception of 'intolerance' was not "sexism, racism, homophobia, and transphobia". In fact, none of these words had even been invented when he was writing!

Popper was very clear that he conceptualized 'intolerance' as people who will use violence and force and power to silence others. This he was specifically referring to intolerance of other beliefs, whether religious or political. This is exactly the kind of intolerance you are committing.

Please read what Popper actually wrote about the paradox before misrepresenting it - I see this error all the time.

>you're making assertions about opinions that I hold, not based on opinions that I've stated, but upon those of "people like [me]."

No, just about opinions you plainly stated - that you think cancel culture is cool because only people on your list are getting cancelled.

Re: 'Sexual favours were the norm in music industry'

#479

Post by sokoloff »

skissane wrote: post #472
sokoloff wrote: post #467

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the individual victim certainly has some interest in the punishment outcomes, but the state also has a proper interest. Neither holds a monopoly. (In particular, was she his only victim? That seems unlikely.)

> I think the individual victim certainly has some interest in the punishment outcomes, but the state also has a proper interest. Neither holds a monopoly The state holds a monopoly. All the victim gets, is the right to be consulted by the prosecution, but the prosecution is free to ignore the victim's opinion, as they have done repeatedly in this case. Geimer asked the courts to drop the case, because she was sick o…

I was making a moral argument on whether the state has a monopoly. Of course the state holds a legal monopoly on the punishment.
Post reply on HN