Posted on 11/03/2014 4:53:53 PM PST by TigerClaws
Doc NYC has canceled a scheduled critics' showing at the request of the movie's rights holder, Esponda Productions
The first press screening of Amy Berg’s An Open Secret, a documentary about child sexual abuse and exploitation in Hollywood, has been canceled at the request of the film's rights holder.
The screening had been scheduled for Tuesday morning in New York City by Doc NYC, the film festival that has slated the film’s world premiere for Nov. 14. It would have been the first look at the potentially controversial movie, which the festival describes on its website as “a sobering look at the lives of children who were exploited and assaulted by some of Hollywood’s most powerful players.”
(Excerpt) Read more at hollywoodreporter.com ...
What? Hollywood is full of queers who molest little boys? I’m shocked!
Bryan Singer’s attorney is doing a good job in his pathetic attempt to cover up the hot tub rape parties.
Hollywood:
“We like airing the dirty laundry of OTHERS. We also like to sling censorship accusations at OTHERS. We also like lots of talk of black lists about OTHERS. Another big theme is greed —of OTHERS. We also bloviate a lot about redistribution of wealth. Yes, of OTHERS.”
This goes back nearly 100 years. I have heard the head of MGM raped Shirley Temple.
Fox, not MGM, and he exposed himself. He didn’t rape her.
they need to put the damned thing up on youtube/ torrent / whatever internet thing NOW, otherwise it will be suppressed by hollyweird
Odd move, no? The lawyers must have issues, I can’t think of any other explanation.
I wonder if Corey Feldman contributed in any way to this film?
Corey Feldman’s new book details sexual abuse he and Corey Haim experienced in Hollywood
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/corey-feldman-book-details-sexual-abuse-coreys-article-1.1490863
Secret Police Tape: Child Star Corey Feldman First Detailed How He Was ‘Molested’ In 1993… But Cops Did ‘Zero’ To Catch Sexual Predator
http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2013/11/secret-police-tape-corey-feldman-first-detailed-rape-in-1993-cops-did-zero-to-catch-sexual-predator/
No kid would be molested in Hollywood if parents would do their job.
The article that started the uproar said she was seventeen, and nobody's been able to put the horse back in the barn.
Please don't count me among Lena Dunham defenders.
It's just that I understand she played doctor at seven, not pedophile at seventeen.
Hollywood is a Pedo playground.
Lena said she bribed her sister to kiss her (Lena) when she was age 17. She said she slept in the same bed with her sister and masturbated.
Don’t read the spin.
Get your facts straight before correcting me in the future or posting on my threads. K?
I haven't read Dunham's book nor do I intend to do so. I find Dunham nauseating and repulsive. I believe she serves an excellent purpose as a bad example.
The 'playing doctor' incident I described above did, in fact, occur when Dunham was seven and not when Dunham was seventeen as is reported in some early articles. I had my facts straight there.
The 'candy' passage in the book says:
As she grew, I took to bribing her for her time and affection: one dollar in quarters if I could do her makeup like a “motorcycle chick.” Three pieces of candy if I could kiss her on the lips for five seconds. Whatever she wanted to watch on TV if she would just “relax on me.” Basically, anything a sexual predator might do to woo a small suburban girl I was trying.
There is no mention of the age of 17 in that excerpted passage, and I never seen an article that specifically says Dunham was seventeen when the bribery-for-kissing incident happened.
The age seventeen can be found in the excerpted passage about the two sisters sharing a bed but, again, not in the candy passage.
As you told me, "Lena said she bribed her sister to kiss her (Lena) when she was age 17."
I don't believe that fact is straight. I believe it's the result of accidentally mashing together two passages and drawing an assumption.
And if are using the proper definitions of 'pedophilia' and 'hebephilia,' there's no indication that either applies to Dunah, the tortured and repugnant soul.
I don’t know why you want to lie to defend a leftist pedo but these are her own words. YOU LOSE THIS ARGUMENT.
Stay away from my threads, you molester enabler:
And this:
As she grew, I took to bribing her for her time and affection: one dollar in quarters if I could do her makeup like a “motorcycle chick.” Three pieces of candy if I could kiss her on the lips for five seconds. Whatever she wanted to watch on TV if she would just “relax on me.” Basically, anything a sexual predator might do to woo a small suburban girl I was trying.
And this:
I shared a bed with my sister, Grace, until I was seventeen years old. She was afraid to sleep alone and would begin asking me around 5:00 P.M. every day whether she could sleep with me. I put on a big show of saying no, taking pleasure in watching her beg and sulk, but eventually I always relented. Her sticky, muscly little body thrashed beside me every night as I read Anne Sexton, watched reruns of SNL, sometimes even as I slipped my hand into my underwear to figure some stuff out.
If Ms. Dunham says that our quotations from her book were “false,” or that our interpretation of those events was libelous under the law, then we look forward to asking her, in her deposition, about why they appeared in her book. We also look forward to asking her why she believes it is now appropriate for a 28-year-old woman to make light of opening her baby sister’s vagina, paying her with candies for prolonged kisses on the lips in the manner of a “sexual predator,” or masturbating in bed next to her prepubescent sister.
You say something false about Dunham's age when she bribed her sister to kiss her (Dunham) and when somebody calls you on it, change the subject and call them a molester enabler?
Call Dunham a pedophile and when somebody questions that categorization, avoid the question and instead call them a molester enabler?
Facts are our friends.
Did I lie about Dunham's age during the 'play doctor' session or about the fact that nothing in the book said the bribery for kissing sessions occurred when Dunham was seventeen? I did not.You made up the age of seventeen and you're mad because I called you on it. Here's the quote from your latest response:
As she grew, I took to bribing her for her time and affection: one dollar in quarters if I could do her makeup like a “motorcycle chick.” Three pieces of candy if I could kiss her on the lips for five seconds. Whatever she wanted to watch on TV if she would just “relax on me.” Basically, anything a sexual predator might do to woo a small suburban girl I was trying.
NOTHING! Nothing in that said that Dunham was seventeen when she bribed her sister to kiss her. You said Dunham was seventeen when she did it. You are the person who said it. See your thread #13: "Lena said she bribed her sister to kiss her (Lena) when she was age 17."
I disagreed with you about Dunham's age; I never disagreed than Dunham kissed her sister.
And funny enough, you quoted exactly the quote I quoted in full to show that you had no basis to say that Dunham kissed her sister when she [Dunham] was seventeen. Because. The. Age. Seventeen. Is. Not. In. That. Quote. You're still attacking me because I questioned your mistake.
Next, I didn't lie to defend a leftist pedo. If anyone lied, you lied to make a point. The currency of the conservative movement is truth. Please quit passing counterfeit money.
I never disputed the second quote. What Dunham said is disturbing. Dunham is twisted. Dunham is repulsive. I said that.
You called Dunham a pedophile. Do you have any earthly idea what the definition of a pedophile is?
The only two years in Dunham's life when she could classify as a pedophile were ages 16 and 17, because one must be at least 16 to be a pedophile. At those ages, Dunham would have had to be primarily or exclusively attracted sexually to a child eleven or younger to be a pedophile. I don't believe either you or I know whether Dunham was primarily interested in men or women or both when she was 16 or 17. If she were, the Dunham may have molested her sister, but Dunham wasn't a pedophile as you called her.
Nothing in Dunham's words say she bribed her sister to kiss her [Dunham] when Dunham was seventeen, as you stated.
Nothing in Dunham's words say she was a pedophile, as you stated.
You never began this by saying Dunham molested a child but that's now the bar you set.
Dunham is a leftist who is deeply disturbed on virtually every level we know about, include issue of sex, sexuality, abortion, racial issues, politics, and male privilege. Say it. Post it. Shout it.
But you're a conservative, d*mmit. Don't make facts up.
If you state as fact that Barack Obama ate three live babies on the thirty-yard line during the first quarter of last night's Monday Night Football game, and I call you on it, that doesn't mean I'm lying to defend a leftist predator.
I wish you a good day, and I mean that sincerely FReeper to FReeper. I'm out of here.
We refuse. We refuse to withdraw our story or apologize for running it, because quoting a woman’s book does not constitute a “false” story, even if she is a prominent actress and left-wing activist. Lena Dunham may not like our interpretation of her book, but unfortunately for her and her attorneys, she wrote that book – and the First Amendment covers a good deal of material she may not like.
In particular, the letter from Ms. Dunham’s lawyers labeled as “false and defamatory” our claims that she “experiment[ed] sexually with her younger sister Grace,” “experimented with her six-year younger sister’s vagina,” and “use[d] her little sister at times essentially as a sexual outlet.” In her desire to curb First Amendment freedoms, Dunham’s attorneys threatened legal action seeking “millions of dollars; punitive damages which can be a multiple of up to ten times actual damages; and injunctive relief.”
And then he said this:
If Ms. Dunham says that our quotations from her book were “false,” or that our interpretation of those events was libelous under the law, then we look forward to asking her, in her deposition, about why they appeared in her book. We also look forward to asking her why she believes it is now appropriate for a 28-year-old woman to make light of opening her baby sister’s vagina, paying her with candies for prolonged kisses on the lips in the manner of a “sexual predator,” or masturbating in bed next to her prepubescent sister.
If Ms. Dunham says that our quotations from her book were “false,” then she should explain whether her statements in which she accused a young college Republican of rape were also false. We look forward to asking her about that in her deposition as well, given that she has reportedly refused to cooperate with Oberlin police to track down the alleged perpetrator, which leaves other young women at risk if her accusations are true.
It is worth noting that Truth Revolt was far from the only outlet to point out these troubling sections in Ms. Dunham’s book. National Review’s Kevin Williamson wrote of “Lena Dunham’s sexual abuse, specifically, of her younger sister, Grace” – the article that first alerted us to Ms. Dunham’s disturbing writings. The Daily Caller’s Derek Hunter has written of Ms. Dunham’s “gleeful sexual abuse of her infant sister, Grace.”
After Truth Revolt’s report on Ms. Dunham’s book, Ms. Dunham took to Twitter with what she termed a “rage spiral,” terming accusations that “I molested my little sister isn’t just LOL – it’s really fucking upsetting and disgusting.” She added, “And by the way, if you were a little kid and never looked at another little kid’s vagina, well, congrats to you.” No, congrats to you, Ms. Dunham – you’ve managed to lead a life so free of criticism that you find it “upsetting and disgusting” when some folks are offended that you “carefully spread open” your baby sister’s vagina, or paid her to kiss you on the mouth in the manner of a “sexual predator,” or masturbated in bed next to her as a teenager. In the real world, folks find such behavior upsetting and disgusting, not reporting on such behavior.
Bullies like Ms. Dunham may believe that firing off legal threats against those who exercise First Amendment rights is perfectly legitimate. But for a woman who proclaims to be an advocate for freedom of speech to attempt to shut down such speech based on her own apparent embarrassment at her own disclosures in her own book demonstrates the totalitarianism of those on the left – and those in the legal and media establis
This is LEARNED BEHAVIOR.
Take a lot a the ‘art’ her father does....
I sincerely hope you are NOT a scoutmaster.
Seriously.
You don’t need to be around kids if you can’t identify this is wildly inappropriate and likely ILLEGAL behavior with children.
Please seek professional counseling as you are exhibiting serious warning signs.
You still haven't figured out that I identify some of the behavior as probably illegal, just as you do, but that, although the behavior is wildly inappropriate and probably illegal, I'm not certain it meets the clinical definition of 'pedophilia,' have you?
You still won't admit you were wrong when you said Dunham was seventeen when she bribed her sister to kiss her on the lips, will you?
You had better start looking for a damned clue as to who you are disparaging there...way out of bounds.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.