Oh No.. Star Treks Lieutenant SULU is Accused of Sexual Assault.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: carewemust

At the rate we're going, there will be more assaulters and victims in Hollywood, than there will be people who haven't been a violator or a victim.

Or, maybe. People will stop tolerating it when they see it or hear about it. Maybe people will speak up when it occurs.

Maybe. Or not.

Show business attracts all kinds, perps and those that allow themselves to be victims because, after all, it IS show business and you wanna be a star at any cost. The average American is fully aware of what "...going to Hollywood to be a star" entails.

originally posted by: carewemust
I really like the Lieutenant Sulu character in the old Star Trek series and movies. But he's now accused of molestation.

A former model and actor is accusing Star Trek icon George Takei of sexual assault in 1981. The accuser, Scott R. Brunton, who was 23 at the time of the alleged incident, claims that Takei took advantage of him when he was most vulnerable.

Additional Info at: www.hollywoodreporter.com...

At the rate we're going, there will be more assaulters and victims in Hollywood, than there will be people who haven't been a violator or a victim.

-cwm

If this keeps up, what we will be left with, is an entertainment industry bereft of men, period. Because they have all at some point grabbed some ass. And that is equal to rape or something. Probably a $10 million offense.

THAT will be a great time for chick flicks. All Reese Witherspoon. All the time.

a reply to: Uberdoubter

I just read guys have something called toxic masculinity,its apparently a disease. It makes us demean women and i guess grab their butts.

The concept of toxic masculinity is used in the social sciences to describe traditional norms of behavior among men in contemporary American and European society that are associated with detrimental social and psychological effects. Such "toxic" masculine norms include dominance, devaluation of women, extreme self-reliance, and the suppression of emotions.

Conformity with certain traits viewed as traditionally male, such as misogyny, homophobia, and violence, can be considered "toxic" due to harmful effects on others in society, while related traits, including self-reliance and the stifling of emotions, are correlated with harm to men themselves through psychological problems such as depression, increased stress, and substance abuse. Other traditionally masculine traits such as devotion to work, pride in excelling at sports, and providing for one's family, are not considered to be toxic.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: carewemust

I never liked Mr Sulu I always preferred Mr Chekov but allegations are easy to make and hard to live down.
Sadly I think this witch hunt will rumble on while people are willing to pay accusers for their stories , we've already had one suicide in the UK because of allegations I wonder how long before the next.

If genuine provable assaults have taken place then of course they should be investigated and if evidence is found prosecutions should follow but that is a matter for the courts not tabloids.

a reply to: carewemust


I know Sulu likes his twitter and here was a response he wrote.

originally posted by: Painterz
a reply to: DerBeobachter


Grabbing a butt is very different for a woman than a man. Because men don't live in a rape culture where unwanted sexual contact can and often does escalate to rape.

So yes, it's very different. Even though it might look the same.

Sexual assault is sexual assault. The ability of the offender to take it to a different level of criminal activity is irrelevant to that.

It's a pretty simple concept: putting your hands on people that don't want your hands on them is wrong. It's utterly mind-boggling why so many people are trying so hard to draw distinctions between the same acts being committed by different people.

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: starwarsisreal

GOP, Democrats should have also been shut down and new political parties should have been formed.

I doubt anybody would disagree with that except for the Trump supporters.

Recall Duke LaCrosse? How about Judge Bork? What they did to Bork is so infamous it spawned its own slang term called "borking" or "borked" but those allegations were eventually proven false ... too late for that SCOTUS bid, of course, which was the whole point. They tried the same thing with Clarence Thomas (pubic hairs on a Coke can, Anita Hill).

It's not that we don't want to believe people when they're telling the truth, it's just that there is a also a history of these thing being used for political gain too when they're not true.

Oh and what was that story in Rolling Stone? You know, the one where they had to pay a bunch of money to injured parties because whole darn thing was big, fat lie about some girl getting gang raped on campus at a frat at U. of Virginia?

Recall the progressive defense of that? Well *that* story might not have been true, but we know it happens so it was true in spirit.

My point with this is that there is a history of using this to play dirty political tricks or to use it for political gain. That cannot be denied. And while we all know Hollywood is full of dirty players, how many of these sudden stories are true allegations of abuse and how many are cases of sour grapes where the injured party was willing enough at the time because he or she thought they were going to get something they didn't? And in how many were that actually pressured into doing what they didn't want to do?

Hollywood is an amoral place at best.

The show with the green chick Kirk was called to a Colony that had the most dangress Insane people they had developed a machine that could help fix the minds .
thing was Garth ( a insane former Caption was there and he took over and planed to get the enterprise .
Garth needed the password that Scotty was told had to be given to be beamed up so had the green chick try and sweet talk Kirk out of it .
Two problems one the chick was nuts and believed she had to kill any one she mated with .
two Garth was nuts and decided to frag the chick and she was killed .

The other show clip with Sulu was when a transported malfunction sent kirk scotty and Ohora into alternate universe in which humans were more Like Klingon and killed there way up the chain .
that clip shows Ohora tring to disarmed a alarm so they could use the transporter to get back home .
I was a Trekie totally Know every one by heart .

As for Sulu he was my least one i liked Spock was first followed by Ohroa .
Always though kirk sucked .

originally posted by: Shamrock6 It's a pretty simple concept: putting your hands on people that don't want your hands on them is wrong.

exactly so. not really a difficult concept to grasp.

I assume the stuff I saw long ago in in this video, Mr Takei told the world he was not gay and was interested in girls when at age about 13 he was molested at camp thus helping to that straight males are turned buy experience at a young age.
He then goes on to laugh about young people being molested and makes it clear he sees it as ok.

Howard was ages ago. His paranoia was well known back then.

Perhaps he had good reason and nothing is what it seems.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: projectvxn

If any of these accusations are proven? Hang 'em. No mercy.

They will bring out cases of nearly of age harassment but they won't show you that little children even infants are being actually raped. The videos are making them money. There is something far deeper here, maybe by letting a surface flaw show, they will be able to hide the deep filth.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: projectvxn

Yup.

Was 10 years in California (to the point of this thread)/

Wow.
Only 3 years in Alabama, in lieu of violence.

So if your raped at 5 you better have your act together by 15.

originally posted by: Aliensun

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: carewemust

At the rate we're going, there will be more assaulters and victims in Hollywood, than there will be people who haven't been a violator or a victim.

Or, maybe. People will stop tolerating it when they see it or hear about it. Maybe people will speak up when it occurs.

Maybe. Or not.

Show business attracts all kinds, perps and those that allow themselves to be victims because, after all, it IS show business and you wanna be a star at any cost. The average American is fully aware of what "...going to Hollywood to be a star" entails.

Many are children! Sometimes very young children, Their parents are often basically selling their kids and there seems no law is there to protect them.

That self-righteous twit?

The op brings forth that the person is claiming that he was assaulted in a sexual way by Takei.

There are several things questions that should be considered:

This is one person, who is claiming that close to 40 years ago, he was assaulted by George Takei. That he was over, having drinks, being personal with the man, and then laid down, due to the amount of alcohol that he had consumed, and when he came to after feeling a hand where it should not be.

Is this sexual assault, yes, as the hand was on a private part of the body.

Now both of these men were at the time consenting adults.

So why now, why after 40 years, is this man coming forward now to make this claim? He could have made the claim back then. He could have sold his story to one of the tabloids and made a small amount of money, but he remained silent.

and there are other questions that are showing up in addition to that as well.

The first is what ever happened to the point of innocent until proven guilty? Should not Takei be given the benefit of the doubt, and should not his accuser be given the right to make a complaint and be taken seriously?

There should be an investigation, where both sides state what they remember, any proof or evidence given to show one way or the other who is right or wrong.

Mess with Trump and your squad takes a dump

#ellectionrevengeporn

a reply to: sdcigarpig

Is this sexual assault, yes, as the hand was on a private part of the body.

but....

Now both of these men were at the time consenting adults.

Feel like you're confused about what one, or both, of these terms mean.

a reply to: Shamrock6

No I am not confused at all. If a man places a hand on the privates or genitals of another without consent of said person it is assault. Police have been using that for years to entrap gay men in stings.

Now I was merely stating the facts of the case. Both of them were of legal age, adults, and due to their age are able to give consent.

The facts as was put out in the article is that 2 consenting adults met. They had dinner and one of them drank too much, then passed out. He awoke to find out that the other was touching him in a way he was not wanting at the time.

a reply to: sdcigarpig

due to their age are able to give consent.

But due to the alcohol and loss of consciousness no consent was ever given on the part of the alleged victim.