Another Hollywood star using his power to abuse underage boys. Hopefully this can be universally condemned by all sides. Can underage children also be part of the @metoo movement or is this guy too powerful for the elite in Hollywood to care what he does to underage boys? On December 7, 2017, three days after The Hollywood Reporter broke the news of Singer’s firing, a Seattle man named Cesar Sanchez-Guzman filed a lawsuit against the director, alleging that Singer had raped him in 2003, when Sanchez-Guzman was 17. The day after that, Deadline Hollywood published an interview with a former boyfriend of Singer’s, Bret Tyler Skopek, in which Skopek described a lifestyle of drugs and orgies. We spent 12 months investigating various lawsuits and allegations against Singer. In total, we spoke with more than 50 sources, including four men who have never before told their stories to reporters. A man we’ll call Eric told us that he was 17 in 1997 when he and Singer had sex at a party at the director’s house; another we’ll call Andy says he was only 15 that same year, when he and Singer had sex in a Beverly Hills mansion. Both men say Singer, who was then in his early 30s, knew they were under 18, the age of consent in California. (They asked The Atlantic to conceal their identity for fear of retaliation, and because they didn’t want certain details about their past made public.) Later in the attack, according to the suit, Singer “forcibly anally penetrated Cesar. Cesar pleaded for him to stop.” Afterward, Sanchez-Guzman says he found Waters above deck and told him what had happened; he says Waters laughed and told him he should feel lucky. Then, Sanchez-Guzman recalls, “Bryan approached me wearing this grotesque smile. Like he was laughing.” Sanchez-Guzman says Singer told him to keep his mouth shut: “Nobody is going to believe you.” And Bravo to the Atlantic for risking being called homophobic and going with this story. These boys deserve just as much attention as the victim children of the Catholic church. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/03/bryan-singers-accusers-speak-out/580462/
**** that guy and he should have been ran out of Hollywood last year. Hopefully this finishes the job.
Ehh, its just boys being boys. That's no big deal, right=) Wait, is it homophobic to bring this to light? Will The Atlantic be charged with homophobia and hate speech?
Or run out of town like Harvey Weinstein. Guess we will see. Shoulda stuck with Polanski. What is it with you and Milk?
Well, since your great orange hope pals around with the sex degenerate Epstein and compliments his choice of underage girls, and you assiduously polish every turd he drops, this latest faux outrage on your part sounds a bit hollow, don'cha think?
#1 I didn't bring up Polanski. Try reading more carefully. #2 Why not bring up Harvey Milk? Do you have some evidence his gay friend and autobiographer was lying about his sex with a 16 year old boy? Did they cancel Harvey Milk Day? Was the ship adorning his name renamed?
On Singer. This is a long running story. Clearly, he is also not the only one who is being accused of this kind of activity. There are a ton of folks, in Hollywood, who keep these kinds of secrets because they understand that their knowledge of them provides them access. We probably won't ever know the detail. I understand that there, to date, has never been an actual set of physical evidence that could validate that any of these accusations can be substantiated from. Nor, are we ever likely to find any. But, unlike others, like Woody Allen, or Roman Polansky, Singer has yet to ever actually be charged, in criminal court, for any of these alleged crimes. That seems to perpetuate these allegations though. I'm rather conflicted about this. When I was growing up, sometimes the only outlet was hooking up with an older dude. Cause who could have every survived the ridicule you'd have been subject to if your attraction to someone in your own school or sphere of friends rejected you, and your secret was at risk? But, I would point out that those situations were entirely consensual on my part. It just was what could happen then. But then, until about 1992 or so, being gay and having sex was actually still a crime in most places. So, there is that...
I think a lot of folks in the community understand how dangerous folks like Milk are/were. He could have just as easily referred to Barney Frank.. or that matter Ed Buck. Those were entirely different times though. But, it still doesn't mean that Milk wasn't a predator.
And the most important part is he is still to this day considered a hero on the left and the LGBT community. For God's sake why? Why is this excused? But most importantly why does the praise continue for a child predator?
I know you didn't. Another poster did, and you replied to it quoting it and adding Milk. Oh so now the onus is on me to bring proof of an ascertain? Funny how you suddenly understand the burden of proof when it's on your side. And no, I have no evidence the writer of that book was lying. I just find your predilection for him to be .. interesting, from a sociological point of view. He could have. But didn't. And one reference in a single book doesn't mean he was a predator either. None of us know him, or what he did. Evidently nobody else who knew him seemed to think as such, or said so in anything that can be referenced now.
It is unclear what you're arguing here. The history is more than just one reference in a single book. There are other contemporary references to Milk and his abuse of under age boys. That you would spend the time trying to defend him for his well documented behavior is, well, unhelpful. It isn't anymore helpful than trying to paper over the private abuse that folks like mr Clinton visited on his victims. Harvey isn't someone in my community that I think it's necessary to hero worship. There are too many others who accomplished far more than Milk did. I understand that somehow, he fits your need to be a tragic figure, but why not find your admiration in someone like Roy Cohn? Why not an historical figure like Alexander? At least they did something for their country, or nation. Why bother yourself over a barely mentionable guy? Or more pointedly, why not find a hero you can admire that isn't tragic in the first place? Admire the buttigeig guy from South Bend, He at least is a mayor.
Yet you claimed I should have stopped with Polanski. Since I never started with Polanski how could I stop with him? Wow. That had to be explained as well? lol And again, you claimed I should have stopped with Polanski. Since I never started with Polanski how could I stop with him? Wow. That had to be explained as well? Do you really think you can wiggle out of that one too? I have the proof and I just gave it to you. Can you possibly read what you've been given? I find your inability to admit you have nothing to dispute the claims from his best friend and biographer not to mention the other man who has testified Milk tried to get him to run away with him when he was underage to be quite disturbing. Exactly what are you relying on to doubt either of these facts other than your far left bias? You have presented no facts whatsoever to support your doubts as usual nor can you dispute the facts I've given to you. Not thats its a new tactic of course.
I’m sorry, but where in any of my posts did I defend or show any admiration for him? I had honestly never heard of him until I started posting here. And I didn’t bring him up in this thread, I simply said to another poster to stick with the guy who’s guilt is obvious and absolute, when denigrating figures of the past, rather then an individual who’s only reference to this was in the Mayor of Castro Street (unless you have other references I am likely unaware of?) Otherwise I hold him in no regard. He was a politician who was killed because he was gay. They made a movie out of it (haven't seen it) and that was that. He is lauded but other then the way he died, he wasn't all that remarkable. Not really all that good with connecting dots, are you? I was grouping the two of you together. I wasn't disputing them. The guy wrote what he wrote and the kid said what he said. I'm just glad society isn't as forgiving now as it must have been back then for it to garner such little attention.
Sorry sport doesn't mass the smell test. You were only responding to me and you didn't say "you guys should" You directed your sentence only to me not multiple people. Weak Cubed. Laughably weak. Next time just admit you screwed up and move on. And of course now you are backing down once you've been called out to explain your quizzical theatrical role when Harvey Milk is brought up in a child predator thread. What a shocker. Seriously, why do you pretend this is the first time you've heard about Harvey Milk and the evidence against him when you have participated in no less than 7 count em 7 threads where Harvey Milk has been discussed? Is your memory that failing and if so I apologize for bringing it up. It is your modus operandi in debates to pretend to be curious when you are not but to pretend after 7 other threads on the subject you participated in to ask the question why this child predator would be brought up in a thread about child predators stretches common sense and logic beyond the breaking point.
We understand for your side its better to sweep these victims under the rug than hold these child predators accountable.
