Lasseter Taking Leave of Absence

[Deleted member 107043]

Huge difference.

If the reports are true- The handler wasn’t assigned as a bodyguard for the women. He was assigned to protect a reputation because of sleazy tendencies.

One is for protection, one is strictly to avoid any potential negative press. The motives for the handler are not the same between the former and the latter. Which means people higher up are just as guilty.

I see.

 

[21stamps]

I'm not in the place to say what a group of women working at the world's most premier animation company need, and neither are you. Faith is nice, but when there is no mechanism to report these kinds of wrongdoings or an atmosphere conducive to sexual harassment report, having someone there to stop the actions in the first place doesn't sound like such a bad idea.

I am in a place to say that women aren’t some delicate helpless beings that need a single man to protect an entire group of them because of their helplessness.

Women aren’t that weak. According to the article- They were in a group, not one on one with him. Viewing women as helpless doesn’t do anything to end this kind of behavior.
I don’t think it was intentional, but some of the comments here are exactly the reason why women are not viewed as complete equals...even when those comments aren’t coming from a place of malice.

 

[Pixieish]

I am in a place to say that women aren’t some delicate helpless beings that need a single man to protect an entire group of them because of their helplessness.

Women aren’t that weak. According to the article- They were in a group, not one on one with him. Viewing women as helpless doesn’t do anything to end this kind of behavior.
I don’t think it was intentional, but some of the comments here are exactly the reason why women are not viewed as complete equals...even when those comments aren’t coming from a place of malice.

I second that...especially since the majority of places in which I have held employment, I have been the only woman, and my co-workers (for the most part) became like my second family.

 

[DisneyDoctor]

I am in a place to say that women aren’t some delicate helpless beings that need a single man to protect an entire group of them because of their helplessness.

Women aren’t that weak. According to the article- They were in a group, not one on one with him. Viewing women as helpless doesn’t do anything to end this kind of behavior.
I don’t think it was intentional, but some of the comments here are exactly the reason why women are not viewed as complete equals...even when those comments aren’t coming from a place of malice.

Bodyguard is a genderless term. You assume a man was the one "protecting" the women. You've done exactly what you claim I've done.

Please, I do not view women as weak. I really like how you assume my values based on an internet forum. You have no idea who I am, not one bit. Not a lot of logic there, huh?

No one has said that women are helpless, I surely haven't at least. If you think that having someone present to stop the actions of a sexual harasser, male OR female, will not help to end this behavior, you are ignorant and blatantly wrong. Most colleges now require interventional training to know how and when to step in and stop sexual harassment. Disney simply put a label on the person doing the job that every individual should have already been doing. Maybe nobody stood up the John Lassater out of fear of losing their job, we don't know. But, suffice to say, no one has called women helpless, and your analysis of the entire sexual harassment pandemic is a bit off.

 

[21stamps]

Bodyguard is a genderless term. You assume a man was the one "protecting" the women. You've done exactly what you claim I've done.

Please, I do not view women as weak. I really like how you assume my values based on an internet forum. You have no idea who I am, not one bit. Not a lot of logic there, huh?

No one has said that women are helpless, I surely haven't at least. If you think that having someone present to stop the actions of a sexual harasser, male OR female, will not help to end this behavior, you are ignorant and blatantly wrong. Most colleges now require interventional training to know how and when to step in and stop sexual harassment. Disney simply put a label on the person doing the job that every individual should have already been doing. Maybe nobody stood up the John Lassater out of fear of losing their job, we don't know. But, suffice to say, no one has called women helpless, and your analysis of the entire sexual harassment pandemic is a bit off.

You are a man, correct?

I think a woman may understand what sexual harassment is.. I don’t think that any woman, especially those over age 35, has not experienced it at least once in her life.

The degrees are what vary..

My comments weren’t mean as insults, and I don’t think the comments I referred to were meant with malice.. but if you don’t recognize what is “stereotyping” women, then even at your young age we all still have so far to go. We’re getting there though.

 

[DisneyDoctor]

You are a man, correct?

I think a woman may understand what sexual harassment is.. I don’t think that any woman, especially those over age 35, has not experienced it at least once in her life.

The degrees are what vary..

My comments weren’t mean as insults, and I don’t think the comments I referred to were meant with malice.. but if you don’t recognize what is “stereotyping” women, then even at your young age we all still have so far to go. We’re getting there though.

Of course I understand what stereotyping is. My generation was the first to be taught it throughout our education. I'm very aware of stereotypes, in fact, my future patients rely very heavily on my cultural awareness. I have not stereotyped women in the least. I have not called them weak. I'm simply saying that having someone there to stop sexual harassment would help the overall situation. We literally take courses describing how to step in and do exactly that. This isn't rocket science. Our schools and government want us all to act like bodyguards protecting our peers from sexual harassment. Notice that I didn't say women. In case you didn't know, men also suffer from sexual harassment. Not at the astronomically high rates that women experience it, but it happens. You see, this isn't about one gender protecting the other, this is about respect of each other regardless of gender identity. If my message portrayed the idea that men need to protect women, I apologize. Those aren't my sentiments. We need to protect each other and make the world a place where sexual harassment is not acceptable.

 

[DisneyDoctor]

You are a man, correct?

I think a woman may understand what sexual harassment is.. I don’t think that any woman, especially those over age 35, has not experienced it at least once in her life.

The degrees are what vary..

My comments weren’t mean as insults, and I don’t think the comments I referred to were meant with malice.. but if you don’t recognize what is “stereotyping” women, then even at your young age we all still have so far to go. We’re getting there though.

As an aside, men understand what sexual harassment is too. Your comment, "I think a woman may understand what sexual harassment is.." makes you look ignorant and sexist. Again, you're assuming. You're assuming that no man understands what sexual harassment is. Not only is that an ignorant opinion, but you have absolutely no evidence to back that claim up. Nor do you have any evidence to back up the claim that that "all women over the age of 35 have experienced sexual harassment." I would really appreciate a little science or statistical information to support your claims.

 

[21stamps]

As an aside, men understand what sexual harassment is too. Your comment, "I think a woman may understand what sexual harassment is.." makes you look ignorant and sexist. Again, you're assuming. You're assuming that no man understands what sexual harassment is. Not only is that an ignorant opinion, but you have absolutely no evidence to back that claim up. Nor do you have any evidence to back up the claim that that "all women over the age of 35 have experienced sexual harassment." I would really appreciate a little science or statistical information to support your claims.

I don’t know what the statistics are.. I’m sure they are out there if you want to find some.

I will refer you to my post.. where is said “I don’t think...”. Which is a little different than your sentence of “all women over the age of 35 have experienced sexual harassment.”

However, yes, I do most definitely think that as a strong probability.

Regardless of if it’s a cat call during a morning run, a comment by a coworker, being passed up for a promotion, lewd comments while out.. and so much more.. all related to nothing more than their gender.

I also think that if you polled every adult male, and every adult female, that there would be an overwhelmingly larger amount of women who have experienced some kind of harassment or gender based discrimination than men.

If you need science to make you believe that.. then I don’t know what else to say.

Have a good day.

 

[DisneyDoctor]

I don’t know what the statistics are.. I’m sure they are out there if you want to find some.

I will refer you to my post.. where is said “I don’t think...”. Which is a little different than your sentence of “all women over the age of 35 have experienced sexual harassment.”

However, yes, I do most definitely think that as a strong probability.

Regardless of if it’s a cat call during a morning run, a comment by a coworker, being passed up for a promotion, lewd comments while out.. and so much more.. all related to nothing more than their gender.

I also think that if you polled every adult male, and every adult female, that there would be an overwhelmingly larger amount of women who have experienced some kind of harassment or gender based discrimination than men.

If you need science to make you believe that.. then I don’t know what else to say.

Have a good day.

Of course women have experienced more harassment and discrimination, I said that exactly in my previous post. You can think whatever you want. Hell, you can think that dogs are in fact aliens. Just because you think that doesn't mean that it's true. If you don't use science to form your opinions, then your statementd have absolutely NO weight behind them. They are invalid and unacceptable.

Placing the words, "I don't think..." in front your original statement doesn't change your opinion. That's common sense. You still stated your opinion without any statistical information to back it. I don't know what world you're living in, but in order to make any claim like the one you did in this world, you absolutely need statistics to back it up. Again, this is common sense. The education system has failed if this is the kind of thinking you employ when discussing these topics.

 

[englanddg]

Of course I understand what stereotyping is. My generation was the first to be taught it throughout our education. I'm very aware of stereotypes, in fact, my future patients rely very heavily on my cultural awareness.

Nonsense.

"First Generation"? Do you think there was a point in recent history when this sort of behaviour wasn't seen as socially unacceptable? When it wasn't considered inappropriate, wasn't scandalous, if not lecherous, and, in some cases, criminal? And, legally, discrimination and later a broader interpretation of harassment has been prosecutable in criminal and civil courts for decades. What isn't helpful, in any sense, is accusing those not guilty of potential crimes, reframing the discussion to conflate harmless actions with harassment, and harassment with assault, and then trying it in the court of public opinion decades after the fact.

These women coming forward, good for them. But, they had the legal recourse to deal with these matters all along. So, I don't have all that much sympathy, as they chose not to act. Agency means responsibility, and with responsibility comes culpability.

As far as "education" about stereotyping, I fail to see how your "cultural awareness" helps you to properly diagnose and treat a sore throat. You gonna lecture the virus on its toxic masculinity until it checks its privilege?

You later speak to statistics, and claim that you can use it to support arguments. Well, this is true. But, are the statistics? The first question one must ask when presented with any statistic, especially one that is so grossly counter to lived experience, is...what methods were used? How large was the sample size? Who was asked? WHAT was asked? When and where were they asked it? All of these things play into the results you will get.

It is foolish to think that statistics are always correct, and even more so to assume that they are not manipulated and/or taken out of context to further a political or social agenda.

What is not helpful is, as I mentioned, trying people in the court of public opinion with zero evidence outside of decades old testimony. The legal structure existed for these women to act, and has for decades. They did not do so. That begs the question...how threatened did they truly feel? Why come forward now? Why not last year, or the year before? Or, I dunno...when it happened?

I do not assume that women are scared little waifs. They can speak up, they can speak out. They have a voice, and always have (and specifically, legally, have for decades). Listening is important, but listening shouldn't, by default, mean accepting.

People can, and do, misinterpret others. People can, and do, mis-remember. People can, and do, maliciously lie.

As an example...

Are you looking at her butt? Or...are you reading her pants...?

We'll let her decide, and we'll try you in the court of public opinion. Now it is time to lose your job.

 

[21stamps]

Of course women have experienced more harassment and discrimination, I said that exactly in my previous post. You can think whatever you want. Hell, you can think that dogs are in fact aliens. Just because you think that doesn't mean that it's true. If you don't use science to form your opinions, then your statementd have absolutely NO weight behind them. They are invalid and unacceptable.

Placing the words, "I don't think..." in front your original statement doesn't change your opinion. That's common sense. You still stated your opinion without any statistical information to back it. I don't know what world you're living in, but in order to make any claim like the one you did in this world, you absolutely need statistics to back it up. Again, this is common sense. The education system has failed if this is the kind of thinking you employ when discussing these topics.

I don’t need “science” to form opinions on anything I have said.

It’s part of life for women, and always has been. Things have been getting better over the years, but sexism, discrimination, and harassment are still around.

There are things that life can teach you which reading statistics can not. I hope for you that you realize this... and don’t form all of our thoughts and opinions on published “statistics” alone.

The fact that someone needs statistics about this subject is odd enough in itself, and displays a lack of awareness to society, past, and present.

 

[DisneyDoctor]

Nonsense.

"First Generation"? Do you think there was a point in recent history when this sort of behaviour wasn't seen as socially unacceptable? When it wasn't considered inappropriate, wasn't scandalous, if not lecherous, and, in some cases, criminal? And, legally, discrimination and later a broader interpretation of harassment has been prosecutable in criminal and civil courts for decades. What isn't helpful, in any sense, is accusing those not guilty of potential crimes, reframing the discussion to conflate harmless actions with harassment, and harassment with assault, and then trying it in the court of public opinion decades after the fact.

These women coming forward, good for them. But, they had the legal recourse to deal with these matters all along. So, I don't have all that much sympathy, as they chose not to act. Agency means responsibility, and with responsibility comes culpability.

As far as "education" about stereotyping, I fail to see how your "cultural awareness" helps you to properly diagnose and treat a sore throat. You gonna lecture the virus on its toxic masculinity until it checks its privilege?

You later speak to statistics, and claim that you can use it to support arguments. Well, this is true. But, are the statistics? The first question one must ask when presented with any statistic, especially one that is so grossly counter to lived experience, is...what methods were used? How large was the sample size? Who was asked? WHAT was asked? When and where were they asked it? All of these things play into the results you will get.

It is foolish to think that statistics are always correct, and even more so to assume that they are not manipulated and/or taken out of context to further a political or social agenda.

What is not helpful is, as I mentioned, trying people in the court of public opinion with zero evidence outside of decades old testimony. The legal structure existed for these women to act, and has for decades. They did not do so. That begs the question...how threatened did they truly feel? Why come forward now? Why not last year, or the year before? Or, I dunno...when it happened?

I do not assume that women are scared little waifs. They can speak up, they can speak out. They have a voice, and always have (and specifically, legally, have for decades). Listening is important, but listening shouldn't, by default, mean accepting.

People can, and do, misinterpret others. People can, and do, mis-remember. People can, and do, maliciously lie.

As an example...

Are you looking at her butt? Or...are you reading her pants...?

We'll let her decide, and we'll try you in the court of public opinion. Now it is time to lose your job.

My replies will be sequential, similar to your format.

There was a point in history when this behavior was acceptable. Think 500, even 300 years ago. Patriarchy in which inappropriate behavior was accepted was the dominant social system and, in fact, accepted. Women were literally property, this is irrefutable. Tell me why, then, all of these allegations are suddenly coming to surface if the social climate prior to recent was so against sexual harassment? This is blatantly wrong and you are extremely ignorant to your surroundings. This is isn't coincide. This isn't the new fad, so to say. The climate has shifted from victim blaming to prosecuting the offender. Sure, it may have been illegal. BUT, and this is huge so pay close attention, legal status doesn't necessarily indicate something is socially acceptable. If sexual harassment was such a socially unaccepted thing, it wouldn't happen. It's as simple as that. And, you'll have to explain your point about accusing those not guilty of potential crimes. I have literally no idea what you're alluding to. John Lasseter, and everyone else in Hollywood who has faced allegations, are guilty of sexual harassment. They used their power to take advantage of women in a sexual manner. Notice take advantage of people sexually, this is the exact definition of sexual harassment. And all of these people have done this. If you're saying they're not guilty, then YOU are advancing the culture that accepts sexual harassment.

Your next paragraph is disgraceful and disrespectful on so many levels. You don't have any sympathy for these women? Quite frankly, you are a sickening person based on this statement. The culture around them wasn't conducive or accepting to coming forward with allegations at the time. Times are changing (see first paragraph) and this is becoming more acceptable. If your true sentiments are that the women are at fault for waiting so long to come forward, then YOU and people like YOU, are the problem. This is absolutely pitiful and you should be ashamed.

Next, please don't comment on my profession with no experience of it. The ignorance in this paragraph is almost vomit-inducing. There are literally hundreds of studies that show people of different race, religion, gender, etc all receive different treatments for the SAME CONDITIONS. Your comments on a topic you are so ignorant on are almost insulting. Do a little research before trying to tell me how my cultural values will affect my future practice.

You described how to do research, congratulations. This is irrelevant to anything I said before. I was criticizing someone for making conjectures not based in research. Again, this is irrefutable. You're description of the research technique, while accurate, adds nothing to this discussion. One cannot make any sound argument without solid statistics to support.

You are literally speaking to conspiracy theories here. Again, irrelevant information. Yes, we need to be critical of research. Should we be skeptical of all research? NO. If this were the case, then there would be no use for research or statistics. Research and statistics are the reason our cure rates for cancer and other historically debilitating diseases have risen steadily.

Scratch what I implied earlier, this paragraph is the worst you've written. You are questioning how threatened these women felt? How dare you. Again, this type of thinking is the reason our society has turned its shoulder to sexual harassment for so long. I'm appalled that you have actually used your brain to think up an argument and this is what was thrown out. This is pathetic. You are wrong on so many levels, and if you fail to see this, then your mindset has been seriously twisted by something that I cannot identify.

Women can speak up, and they are, FINALLY! This is because society is starting to care about what they are saying! Society is FINALLY standing with women and saying enough is enough. This is an amazing thing and I'm so proud to live in era where the attitude towards such a vile act is changing.

You know what, THIS last paragraph with the picture, is the absolutely revolting and the worst. You are implying that when women wear clothing like this they are inviting others to look at them in an effort to prosecute them on sexual harassment. THIS is quintessential victim blaming. You are insinuating that the woman doesn't care what people look at, but they are guilty no matter what. This is disgraceful not just to me, but to women. You're portraying this as the women's problem, not the sexual harasser. Boy oh boy, if this is the attitude shared by the general public, then maybe our societal problems aren't improving.

 

[DisneyDoctor]

I don’t need “science” to form opinions on anything I have said.

It’s part of life for women, and always has been. Things have been getting better over the years, but sexism, discrimination, and harassment are still around.

There are things that life can teach you which reading statistics can not. I hope for you that you realize this... and don’t form all of our thoughts and opinions on published “statistics” alone.

The fact that someone needs statistics about this subject is odd enough in itself, and displays a lack of awareness to society, past, and present.

You are an ignorant person. Of course sexism, discrimination, and harassment are still around. I have not once said they weren't. Life experiences are not the same for everyone, right? Can you get behind that? A rich white women has experienced life MUCH differently than a poor women of color. This is where research comes in. Research can show us these differences and we can work to change our society, but I digress. You need statistics to form opinions. Let's say, for example, your city was hit by an asteroid shower, but only your city. You can't make your opinions about asteroids in the ENTIRE COUNTRY based on your limited experience that occurred in only your city. Think critically about this, it makes sense.

 

[21stamps]

Nonsense.

"First Generation"? Do you think there was a point in recent history when this sort of behaviour wasn't seen as socially unacceptable? When it wasn't considered inappropriate, wasn't scandalous, if not lecherous, and, in some cases, criminal? And, legally, discrimination and later a broader interpretation of harassment has been prosecutable in criminal and civil courts for decades. What isn't helpful, in any sense, is accusing those not guilty of potential crimes, reframing the discussion to conflate harmless actions with harassment, and harassment with assault, and then trying it in the court of public opinion decades after the fact.

These women coming forward, good for them. But, they had the legal recourse to deal with these matters all along. So, I don't have all that much sympathy, as they chose not to act. Agency means responsibility, and with responsibility comes culpability.

As far as "education" about stereotyping, I fail to see how your "cultural awareness" helps you to properly diagnose and treat a sore throat. You gonna lecture the virus on its toxic masculinity until it checks its privilege?

You later speak to statistics, and claim that you can use it to support arguments. Well, this is true. But, are the statistics? The first question one must ask when presented with any statistic, especially one that is so grossly counter to lived experience, is...what methods were used? How large was the sample size? Who was asked? WHAT was asked? When and where were they asked it? All of these things play into the results you will get.

It is foolish to think that statistics are always correct, and even more so to assume that they are not manipulated and/or taken out of context to further a political or social agenda.

What is not helpful is, as I mentioned, trying people in the court of public opinion with zero evidence outside of decades old testimony. The legal structure existed for these women to act, and has for decades. They did not do so. That begs the question...how threatened did they truly feel? Why come forward now? Why not last year, or the year before? Or, I dunno...when it happened?

I do not assume that women are scared little waifs. They can speak up, they can speak out. They have a voice, and always have (and specifically, legally, have for decades). Listening is important, but listening shouldn't, by default, mean accepting.

People can, and do, misinterpret others. People can, and do, mis-remember. People can, and do, maliciously lie.

As an example...

Are you looking at her butt? Or...are you reading her pants...?

We'll let her decide, and we'll try you in the court of public opinion. Now it is time to lose your job.

First off.. I lived in Juicy Couture in my 20s.. they had a great pet line as well!lol

I agree with about the accusations though.
I’ve said this continually about Bill O’Reilly.. so far I have not heard one account that shows him deserving of losing his job.
The “settlements”? Maybe he did something illegal to the women he settled with.. who knows. None of us know.

I said earlier in this thread, or another with the same name (can’t remember which) - Accustaions are not proof of guilt.
Society needs to stop treating them as such.
We’ve suddenly developed a blood thirsty need to be judge and jury without all of the facts.

I can understand a woman being afraid to go public, but why all of these women, and why now? So many decades later? It is strange.

 

[Pixieish]

First off.. I lived in Juicy Couture in my 20s.. they had a great pet line as well!lol

I agree with about the accusations though.
I’ve said this continually about Bill O’Reilly.. so far I have not heard one account that shows him deserving of losing his job.
The “settlements”? Maybe he did something illegal to the women he settled with.. who knows. None of us know.

I said earlier in this thread, or another with the same name (can’t remember which) - Accustaions are not proof of guilt.
Society needs to stop treating them as such.
We’ve suddenly developed a blood thirsty need to be judge and jury without all of the facts.

I can understand a woman being afraid to go public, but why all of these women, and why now? So many decades later? It is strange.

Agreed. And I worry that the importance of the accusations and any outcomes/resolutions, etc. may get watered down because of the quantity of older occurrences.

 

[GiveMeTheMusic]

First off.. I lived in Juicy Couture in my 20s.. they had a great pet line as well!lol

I agree with about the accusations though.
I’ve said this continually about Bill O’Reilly.. so far I have not heard one account that shows him deserving of losing his job.
The “settlements”? Maybe he did something illegal to the women he settled with.. who knows. None of us know.

I said earlier in this thread, or another with the same name (can’t remember which) - Accustaions are not proof of guilt.
Society needs to stop treating them as such.
We’ve suddenly developed a blood thirsty need to be judge and jury without all of the facts.

I can understand a woman being afraid to go public, but why all of these women, and why now? So many decades later? It is strange.

You don't pay someone $32 million to go away if all you did was read "Juicy" while looking at her butt.

 

[21stamps]

You are an ignorant person. Of course sexism, discrimination, and harassment are still around. I have not once said they weren't. Life experiences are not the same for everyone, right? Can you get behind that? A rich white women has experienced life MUCH differently than a poor women of color. This is where research comes in. Research can show us these differences and we can work to change our society, but I digress. You need statistics to form opinions. Let's say, for example, your city was hit by an asteroid shower, but only your city. You can't make your opinions about asteroids in the ENTIRE COUNTRY based on your limited experience that occurred in only your city. Think critically about this, it makes sense.

I appreciate that you appear to be fond of the word “ignorant”.

Just an FYI- the harassment of a rich white woman and a poor woman of color would still be - harassment. The subject we’re speaking about is gender, and it does not matter what color you are or what tax bracket you are in. It is something that women have dealt with for decades...and longer.

You still need statistics to show you that.. spend some time and try to find them, I’m sure they exist.

We aren’t and most likely, won’t get anywhere with this conversation between us. If you can’t acknowledge that it is something that the majority of women have dealt with- on some scale, at some time in their life, then you truly are ignorant to the realities of women.
I’m not even using that term in a snarky way, just the appropriate meaning.

 

[21stamps]

Agreed. And I worry that the importance of the accusations and any outcomes/resolutions, etc. may get watered down because of the quantity of older occurrences.

Me too.

 

[21stamps]

You don't pay someone $32 million to go away if all you did was read "Juicy" while looking at her butt.

What did he do? This is my problem.. I’ve watched probably close to every interview about him. I’ve seen women say that he said some derogatory, disrespectful, inappropriate comments.. but nothing on the scale of sexual predator.. and nothing that imo should end a career.

A settlement isn’t an admission of guilt.. many times it’s to avoid scandal and negative press.
I just wish there was something a little more concrete for us to go on, than only a dollar amount.

 

[GiveMeTheMusic]

What did he do? This is my problem.. I’ve watched probably close to every interview about him. I’ve seen women say that he said some derogatory, disrespectful, inappropriate comments.. but nothing on the scale of sexual predator.. and nothing that imo should end a career.

A settlement isn’t an admission of guilt.. many times it’s to avoid scandal and negative press.
I just wish there was something a little more concrete for us to go on, than only a dollar amount.

We don't know what he did, but whatever it was, it was bad enough for Fox News to see him as a liability and terminate his employment. It's that simple.