!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
Wahlberg was arrested, charged, and served time (albeit a very little), also his main offense occurred in 1988. Spacey and Weinstein were continuing to offend, and along with Cosby were serial offenders.
So you have a Wahlberg who was a piece of shit as a youth and then (as far as we know) corrected himself and remained hate-crime/assault free for going on nearly 40 years now vs rapists who were active until they were publicly outed.
[Johnny Trinh] said he lost the eye in a 1975 grenade explosion while he was with the South Vietnamese army.
During the assault in Boston, Wahlberg punched Trinh in the eye after first hitting another Vietnamese man in the head with a large stick and hurling racial slurs.
“He was young and reckless but I forgive him now,” said Trinh, who did not know his assailant wound up a famous movie star. “Everyone deserves another chance.”
“I would like to see him get a pardon. He should not have the crime hanging over him any longer.”
There's an appreciable difference between beating up a guy and sexually assaulting many multiple people for decades.
Both are bad, but one is badderer.
Is beating up a guy baddery?
Baddery & a salt.
The fact that you have no scale on how to rank those things is very concerning. Like, wow. You actually do not see the difference between an accident, violence, and rape? Just wow.
When Wahlberg assaulted people when he as 15 and 16 years old. That doesn't excuse the behavior, but 15/16 year olds aren't adults with fully formed brains. Wahlberg also went to the police and claimed responsibility for the attack. He then plead guilty in court and served time. It still bothers me how racially motivated it was and for that I would personally always have disdain for Wahlberg.
Cosby was 28 years old for his first time of rape allegations. There would be more than a dozen other women that came forward with reports. The most recent was Feb of 2000 when Cosby was then 63 years old. Cosby was a fully formed adult doing these horrible acts to women he had power over, and he used that power to abuse them.
Spacy and Weinstein also did their horrible acts as fully formed adults and had a repeated pattern of doing them again and again to people they had power over.
Cosby kept doing it, even after it had come to light, and he had been sued multiple times. I read an account by a guy whose job it was to take a bag of cash once a month, and distribute cash payments to Cosby's victims around town. Cosby's downfall was a huge disappointment for me. I had been a huge fan as a kid, buying his albums, and watching his shows.
And Weinstein was another true monster, and so were all those who knew what he was doing, and didn't do anything about it. One female agent said she refused to send female actresses to Weinstein auditions unless it came with a script, and was in a room with multiple people. She refused to send actresses to "private" auditions. But she didn't call the cops, either.
i think beating someone up is less vile and disgusting than the other crimes listed
It's a lot more than just beating someone up. Mark has committed numerous hate crimes.
His last incident was almost 25 years ago from the looks of it. And he's since apologised for his actions, sincerely enough for the victim to forgive him. At what point does somebody get away from the mistakes of their past?
and he did a russell brand move by becoming"devout christian" as a shield.
Polanski admitted raping a child and still worked without any issues for decades. Top actors didn't see any issues in working with him and he even won an Oscar. Why? I have no idea.
People totally ignored all the creepy things Micheal Jackson did because his songs were so good.
Woody Allen had to do some explaining but wasn't canceled.
Chris Brown is still getting to the top of Billboards 200.
It's not a simple "guilty/not-guilty" issue. It's a mix of how much money you have, how much money you can still make (how loyal is your fan base and what do they care about) and how good PR team do you have.
Polanski had plenty of issues, including that he could never come to America, which is a liability when you are trying to make movies within the Hollywood system. He found people to work with, but we don't hear about all those that refused to work with him, and I'm sure there were plenty. He managed to have a decent career, but to say he had no issues at all simply isn't accurate.
Michael Jackson's allegations are tough. I've been a big fan all my life, I seen all the allegations and evidence, and I'm still on the fence.
Woody Allen is definitely a weird guy, but I looked into those allegations, too, and there are a lot of problems with them. Family dynamics can be complicated, dramatic, and toxic, and that could explain this. Woody being such a bizarre character makes it easy for others to believe bad stuff. Or maybe it's true. Without a court case, evidence, witnesses, etc., it's impossible to know.
Chris Brown's guilt as a serious abuser is proven. Perhaps his continued popularity is due to his reputation. Even Domestic Abusers need tunes, and he's their man.
Did you see the MJ documentary where the kid (now adult) and his family came forward to tell what happened?
Even if you thought the info about MJ masturbating to the kid bent over is fake for some reason, the provable logistics are consistent with a grooming pedophile.
Flatter the kid, promise him fame, same with family. Pay for their trips to be with you on tour. Book kid into same room as MJ, but book parents on a different floor or other end of building. Etc
He managed to have a decent career
Dude, he won an Oscar in 2003. Best Director. Calling this "decent" career is extremely disingenuous. He worked with Jodie Foster, Kate Winslet, Christoph Waltz, Ewan McGregor and Johnny Depp. All at the top of their careers, very much able to decide who they want to work with and they worked with him. He is still well respected in Poland and France and many different governments protected him from prosecution. When US tried to detain him Polish government ignored the laws to shield him.
With Woody Allen I'm taking about him marrying his step daughter, not the unconfirmed allegations.
I know people who are plugged into film studies, academia, etc., and there is definitely a bias against him, and his legacy will be stained. You can point to as many stars as you want, but you will never know how many turned him down.
She wasn't his step-daughter. He wasn't married to Mia Farrow, and she wasn't a biological daughter to Mia, either. Still gross, but technically, y'know?
I'm just saying that many directors would kill to have a career like him and he admitted to rape. Could he achieve more if he didn't rape a child and was allowed entry into US? Maybe but it's really hard to argue he was punished by the industry.
Both him and Woddy simply show that some people can get away with things others can't. Depends on the factors I mentioned.
Besides all the other things people listed, in law we appreciate that sexual violence is kind of worse than just physical violence, and if there's power dynamics at play and psychological dependency, it gets even more morally apprehensive.
What I'm saying even just the sexual nature makes it worse for me, but of course there's more.
That said, I did not know about what Mark Wahlberg did, and obviously not great.
I think sex crimes are much more character defining. Personally, I dont think there are many who push themselves toward violence and murder. Sure there are those okay with violence and psychos that kill for pleasure but nowhere near the level of sex crimes.
I also think that violent people can be rehabilitated whereas sexual deviants can only hide from themselves.
I dont think a single instance 40 years ago is enough to hold someone to account today but if it were sexual I would not believe it were a single instance.
Murder has a very specific legal definition. That is not what Matthew Broderick did.
It is wild what celebrity scandals do and do not stick!
This culture looks down on sexual assault (rightfully so), but it glorifies violence in many cases.
also the fact asian hate crimes arnt seen as serious as ones done against other POCs. racism against asian in hollywood isnt seen as much of effect as it would if was done to african american. because asians are and sitll heavily stereotyped in hollywood.
Sexual is worse
And now he is pushing some stupid christian app. What a joke he's become.
racism agianst non-south ASIAN seems to be glossed over compared to blacks, jewish people, and even lgbtq+. almost all the attacks against asians are almost never on the news for very long.
to be fair spacey wouldve gotten off scott free if rapp dint come do interviews before the pandemic, he just dug his own grave deeper because he try to excuse his behaviour of SA-ing gay minors.
I would argue racism against south Asians is fairly normalized also as there have been targetted hate campaigns online which spill over into the real world. It goes back to the model minority myth and both not being a traditionally disenfranchised group.
One is a pattern of behaviour. The other may be a one off
Four know incidents with Wahlberg, how many is needed for a pattern?
Ahhhh didn't realise there was 4