The Blue Pill.

[BIAD]

With the recent dark-looks at Hollywood's casting couches being displayed across the first-world's media,
the focus seems to be on the moral outrage from discovering that such repugnant acts occurred.

The walrus of a movie producer, Harvey Weinstein is the sex-addicted pinata for October and the only
stance that may parallel the dirty bastard's standards, are the hesitant developing narratives of the movie
industry's well-known practice by the mainstream media.



As Mystic Wanderer recently pointed out in the Shout Box, this website is frequented by 'old foggies' and
as such a person, I can recall that the practice of a would-be star having to succumb to a Producer or
Director's carnal-demands, was an accepted way of developing one's career.

Of course it's wrong and anyone forcing themselves onto another for whatever reasons is a habit that
belongs in the jungle and doesn't necessarily means with the animals. But can Weinstein's sexual cravings
be solely be down to his own machinations...? And with all respect to those who were exploited by this
pig-of-a-human, I will offer my reasons for asking this question.

Of course, the majority of the public, the media and fellow-employees of the women involved were aware
that this type of activity took place. I'm sure that sections of California's law enforcement knew who abused
starlets and where it occurred. Obviously, those in Weinstein's inner-circle and the victims of him knew too.

If all of these factions were aware of this behavior and nobody ever utilised the forces available to stop it,
then the men and women who work and benefit from the global enterprise must have accepted it as part of
their business and ergo, allowed it.

So why wasn't it flagged decades ago?
Because it was accepted and covered-up -intentionally or not, by all those listed above.
Yeah, now the media around the world are offering their customers a half-hearted look of surprise and
indignation, but it's only based on the fact that the story has turned that way.
If the accounts could've been squashed, they would have been. That's what has happened for those decades.

Movie stars and singers have been ideal vehicles of social conditioning for years and ironically, the lifestyles
they live have never been questioned by the gullible public that they spout their nonesense to! 
But the Hollywood priests who annoint and bless a nobody into riches and comfort, seem -until recently, to be
beyond the rules of the society they indirectly control.

'Do as I say, not as I do'... this dark credo seems to be having light shone on it more than ever and I'm sure
the politically-controlled media will be all-hands-to-the-pumps to quell any public outrage of this crude behavior
of parts of the establishment.

More and more, it's becoming obvious that to the mushroom-kept public that when a person of note states
you are something defamatory, it's because that accuser is transmitting their own failings in the hope you'll
never discover their hidden secrets.

So I will suggest the MSM will offer the notion that Weinstein is a victim of a disorder that is rare, but is
regularly seen in the public environment. My betting is on a nuance-based narrative that is behavior stems
from a tradition of 'one-hand-washes-the-other' and the wealthly starlets should've brought it to light before
they became famous.

In my humble opinion, Kubrick was telling us.