Miracle: Harvey Weinstein Cured Of Sex Addiction After Only One Week In Rehab

The common man’s experience of addiction recovery typically involves a twelve-step group, perhaps in a church basement or part of a forlorn low-rent office building. Strong coffee is ubiquitous, as is chain-smoking when permitted. It begins like this:

Jim: My name is Jim, and I’m an alcoholic.
All: Hi, Jim.
Me: My name is Beau. Where’s the keg?

However, addiction recovery for the rich and famous is different. It’s big business too.

Harvey Weinstein checks in

Per The Blast:

According to our sources, Weinstein was planning to go to Switzerland for treatment, but his brother Bob suggested he go to The Meadows, a treatment facility in Arizona. We’re told Bob even offered to pay for it.

Bob suggested The Meadows, we’re told, because the facility is popular among celebrities. Michael Phelps, Tiger Woods, and Selena Gomez have all reportedly spent time there.


As we previously reported, Weinstein was very upset when he was told he could not take his cell phone with him into treatment. His position was he needed it to keep on top of business and personal affairs while he sorts out the scandal.

Indeed, according to their rules, cell phones aren’t allowed, which is common procedure for rehab facilities. Further, “There is a three day waiting period after admission before patients are permitted to use the phone. Monitored phone times are designated four times daily.” Granted, it’s a hassle for someone with pressing problems to have to wait three days. On the other hand, giving it a rest might be a relief.

Rehab the celebrity way

Sigmund Freud would’ve approved.

The Meadows includes lectures, and common twelve-step groups too, but there’s much more. Some of their many amenities include Tai Chi, meditation, yoga and acupuncture, and even horse therapy. Conditions other than addictions are treated too. According to Rehab Reviews:

Perhaps the most idiosyncratic aspect of Meadows is Survivors, the full week of treatment dedicated to battling clients childhood issues—present or not—where residents mix with daytime clients who are just coming in for that week. Some of the activities during this five day stint include carrying around a teddy bear as a way to help residents access what Meadows calls the “inner child,” and striking stuffed animals or chairs with a Nerf bat as a way to release buried tensions. While inner child work is important and can be extremely beneficial, it has to be done right; so potential residents should do their research to make sure the Meadows’ approach is palatable to them.

Per the Daily Mail:

Blacked-out limos swish silently through the imposing stone gates and up the winding, mile-long drive that meanders through the pristine, cacti-dotted Sonoran Desert.

The still air is broken only by the gentle sound of splashing from one of the magnificent ornamental marble fountains dotted around the manicured 14-acre grounds.

At reception, a smiling team is on hand to welcome travellers with a cool drink before they are whisked away to individual hacienda-style lodges complete with sunken granite baths.

All that may sound pretty yuppified. Still, rehab is never entirely a walk in the park. It’s understandable, given the difficult conditions they treat.

Neil Strauss (writer of The Game, PUA handle Style) also has an addiction recovery experience. The unnamed facility he described in The Truth closely resembles The Meadows: their color coding system, among several other details. Neil’s first experience was thorough suicide prevention protocols, although he wasn’t suicidal. (Still, there’s a reason).

The rules were very stringent, especially for sex addicts; he was classified into “code red”. A top counselor was particularly grouchy and prudish. She wasn’t exactly Nurse Ratched wielding a syringe of Thorazine. However, her attitudes weren’t making it easier for Mystery’s old friend Style to cough up the red pill. Neil went in strongly motivated, yet found all this barely tolerable.

How would the most rich and powerful clients—used to giving orders, receiving adulation, and seldom being told “no”—consider a similar experience? It’s unlikely they’d be happy about it. This especially might be so if they felt under pressure to enter treatment.

The Weinstein miracle

Rose McGowan and Harvey Weinstein—this did not end well.

At The Meadows, their standard treatment for sex addiction now is the Gentle Path program. (It costs a cool $66K, but for some of those rich dudes, it’s no pricier than a grocery run is for us.) This lasts 45 days:

How to stop sex addiction? Why is a 45-day program recommended?

Treating addiction effectively requires long term dedication to your personal recovery. There is no such thing as a get well quick response to addiction. It takes longer than four weeks to get the traction you need to change the life long held beliefs and behaviors that are rooted in addictions. Scientific evidence reveals that individuals who remain in treatment longer have a better chance of maintaining long term sobriety.

Despite the above, Harvey finished his treatment in a week. What an amazing success—those decades of casting couch stunts were nullified with seven days of therapy!

This miraculously efficient treatment protocol has emerged just in time. Scores of other Hollywood types, media figures, politicians (even Jesse Jackson), and others got deluged with accusations since the Weinstein story broke. By the time the avalanche is over, surely many other guys will need this extremely efficient seven-day cure. This novel therapy was quite well timed—just as medical marijuana serendipitously came along right before narrow angle glaucoma in the early 20s age bracket became a vast epidemic in participating states.

On a more serious note, per TMZ‘s article on October 20, it turns out this wasn’t the 45 day full meal deal after all, but a seven day program that was to end on Saturday (October 23). The Meadows does have a five day men’s sexual recovery workshop, though the dates don’t coincide with their schedule for these events. So what really happened? Change of plans?

Following this, he was intending to stay in Arizona for about another month, “because he doesn’t want excessive distractions and wants to continue working with his doctors.” The rest of the article details announcements from his psychiatrist (who had his permission to talk about it), clarifying things and dispelling rumors. Damage control items include:

  • Yes, he’s taking the program seriously.
  • No, he wasn’t ranting that people were out to get him.
  • He made it only to one group session, because all the other sessions were one-on-one.
  • Although he experienced anger, nobody else would’ve been in a position to know this.

It didn’t mention the other stories that have surfaced concerning his therapy. For example, one alleged tale involved arriving fifteen minutes late to a group meeting, then falling asleep until being awakened by the cell phone he smuggled in.

Perhaps some cynics out there might wonder if the shrink is trying to win an Oscar. Still, as far as aftermath for this big scandal is concerned, these are picayune matters. Hiring an Israeli rent-a-spy firm to dig for dirt on accusers like Rose McGowan was rather more serious.

Is this for real?

This is the right way to act like you’re sorry (that you got caught).

The increasing medicalization of immoral or otherwise unacceptable conduct leaves us with several endlessly debatable matters of neurobiology, psychology, and philosophy. Where is the line between bad habits and behavioral addiction? Are free will and moral accountability reduced for addicts, or is the “diminished capacity” argument a big cop-out? Is the casting couch gambit truly a compulsive behavior, similar to voyeurs, kleptomaniacs, or flashers?

Finally, the traditional “repentant sinner” act is oddly more sincere. (Playing the “I found Jesus” card would’ve made Mr. Weinstein look pretty silly, but work with me on this.) In the old days, wearing burlap or a hairshirt was how it went, and maybe some self-flagellation too. Lately, “sackcloth and ashes” are out; blubbering confessions on TV are in vogue. After Bill Clinton got caught, he started attending church with Hillary. (Oddly for them, they never got struck by lightning.) He always made sure to carry his Bible prominently, as a prop for the TV cameras. The penitent act saves the cost and hoopla of halfheartedly going through the motions in rehab, though neither are convincing.

Read More: Does The Hollywood Elite Use Rituals And Sexual Blackmail To Keep Its Stars In Line?

58 thoughts on “Miracle: Harvey Weinstein Cured Of Sex Addiction After Only One Week In Rehab”

  1. As someone who’s been involved in (and now leads) a 12-step program, I can attest that there is absolutely NO FUCKING WAY that a lifetime of mental conditioning, enablement, and an unbending sense of sociopathic narcissism, can be eliminated in less time than a library book check-out. Most of these high-end rehab facilities merely lecture the addict that, “hey, what you did was wrong, but I love you” and offer rather pithy, non-spiritual temporary coping mechanisms that never address the psychological components that make up an addicts mindset. Rest assured, Harvey will go back to his old ways, albeit with a little more “I was sloppy the first time; won’t make that mistake again” vigilance on his behavior.

    1. Not only will this fat slob go back to his old ways; but most of his ‘victims’ will too….by that I mean they’ll resume sleeping with him.

      1. That is almost always the case. And it also ties into this “I won’t be as careless next time” mindset that they believe translates into ‘maturity.’

        1. Hahahaha, great observation Dr. Lucius. They’ll achieve “maturity,” yes- and then resume banging him. He’ll ‘forgive’ them;)

  2. This guy, and all similar guys, are causing unbelievable harm to non-celebrity, non-multimillionaire men. He’ll get away with this; the brunt will be born by the rest of men.

    1. Amen. When in the beginning a liberal Jew was being mashed for being a pervert, I was happy about it. But it did not take any long to see that this thing would be used to blame ALL men.

      1. Right on Tyler, if it looks to good to be true- it is. This will cause the rest of men serious problems. Ad the women will be waiting around to be approached, while crickets chirp.

    2. “…He’ll get away with this; the brunt will be borne by the rest of men.
      Tell us (“the rest of men” who saw THAT coming) something that we don’t already know.
      The only good thing about all of this mess, is that the numbers of MGTOW will be growing even more and faster than before.

    3. If all men were suddenly taken to another galaxy by space aliens and the huwoman race was around centuries from now, a complete broken down primitive mess (as it would be), men would still be blamed. At worst this Weinstein fiasco merely accelerated the existing process a bit.

    1. Because he is a fat ugly Jewish movie producer. Plenty of women will still do his bidding in order to live their “dream”.
      Sex addict? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

        1. Underdog, I may have been a dick to you in the past for various reasons. What you write is generally sound. We are, doubtlessly, allies.

  3. “Treating addiction effectively requires long term dedication to your personal recovery. There is no such thing as a get well quick response to addiction. It takes longer than four weeks to get the traction you need to change the life long held beliefs and behaviors that are rooted in addictions.”
    Belief & Behaviour modification can be approached in different ways. We have a pretty good idea of what Weinstein’s behaviour were so in that sense alone it should be possible to go from say ‘wanking into a pot plant’ to ‘not wanking into a pot plant’ with relative ease using just behaviour modification techniques. Beliefs, or at least thoughts, may also be considered behaviour in their own right; speech and action are linked (as implied in the phrase ‘speech act’. Yet, if we know what his outward behaviours were (towards women / plants) we may or may not know what his thoughts and beliefs were. We know that he claims to be a feminist and to believe in feminist ideology (because of both his statements about gender equality and his actions in pushing pukey feminist films upon all of us) but we don’t necessarily know much about the kinds of beliefs that led him to do the things he’s accused of.
    Now for the MSM, SJWs etc it will be assumed that despite his virtue signalling about feminism and social justice he was being cynical and that his actions towards women betray the belief structure of ‘toxic masculinity’. Indeed the entire edifice of ‘MeToo’ depends entirely on the kind of thinking that resulted in Hollywood Casting Couch abuse being continuous with the kind of sexism / misogyny we hear about endlessly in the Guardian and other sanctimonious commie rags.
    But even if we allow for the possibility that there might be “red-blooded” ‘lad culture’ type sexism / ‘rape culture’ thinking behind his relentless pursuit of beautiful actresses is that all there is to it. Some have come out with what might be considered anti-semitic explanations that hypothesise racial factors, usually involving the word ‘shiksa’ in the title. But neither of those explanations or types of explanations tell us why he wanted to be watched masturbating into a pot plant. What exactly is that about? Is that a completely random act or are there beliefs of some kind involved here about why wanking into a pot plant is a really cool thing to do?
    There have a couple of jewish writers who’ve pretty much said ‘oh-oh’ we might be dealing with some kind of sabbatean thinking here. Well actually one of them implied this about this in an article comparing Philip Roth’s Portnoy’s complaint. Another I think it was Gal Gadot – I jest, it was Gilad Atzmon – who’s something of a renegade in the jewish world – was more specific and related it to the idea of ‘redemption through sin’. It should be pointed out here that sabbateanism (a 17/18th century messianic movement that flourished sporadically centuries ago but remains influential within the history of ideas at the very least) was opposed to orthodox judaism proper. Weinstein is jewish. Wanking into a pot plant is against orthodox judaism, but arguably it isn’t against sabbateanism which sees sin – in some circumstances – as potentially redemptive. Even if Weinstein had never heard of this movement its quite possible he was influenced by such ideas (as perhaps Roth had been). All of this is relevant because the question of whether he can be cured of sex addiction may well relate not just to external behaviours but to very particular beliefs. If there is any part of his pot plant behaviour that relates to the idea of redemption through sin then how exactly is he supposed to become a “repentant sinner” ?
    Please don’t take the above as any kind of generalised criticism of jews or judaism. Sabbateanism is not judaism. Its supposed to be the opposite thereof. To be somewhat charitable it addresses at least the idea that some taboos may be there to be broken, including potentially for quasi ethical reasons: we could well ask – what exactly is the reason for the societal taboo on wanking into a pot plant? Isn’t it an evil in itself if we waste good money on baby bio grow when we’ve got our own home grown baby batter just going to waste? Personally I don’t care if Weinstein wanks into a pot plant, or if joyously re-enacting the sin of Onan as part of an off the books Harvey Weinstein theatre production. Rose’s M.’s Garden though is another matter. He shouldn’t have done that. And if he isn’t going to do it again, and beliefs of that sort were in play when he watered her flower then being cured of ‘toxic masculinity’ isn’t going to cut the (order of the) mustard (seed)

    1. I prefer not to get into such matters unnecessarily. However, the subject has come up, so here’s another take on it:
      Anyway, I don’t think that the potted plant business has to do with Shabbatai Zvi, or any kind of antinomian “redemption through sin” thing. More likely it’s because he’s 1) weird, and 2) so rich and powerful he could get away with anything (up until recently).

      1. yeah, that’s the article I had in mind but couldn’t remember where it’s from.
        I tried to be careful about what I was claiming. I’m not suggesting he’s a a self identifying sabbatian or even that’s he heard of the movement although its not unlikely that he has – it was a major dissenting movement. Ideas though filter down through history, and sabbatean influence (and anti-nominaism) is almost certainly present in some of the progressive moments in jewish (and arguably also gentile) history. It might be argued that the reform movement in judaism would be unintelligible without sabbateanism although that’s not to suggest that influence there would be the same as for Weinstein.
        The significance of the pot plant is the same as with the activities of Portnoy – it represents a violation of traditional taboos, which in judaism as any self-aware jew must I imagine necessarily know, requires the separation of something things from other things. Meat and milk for instance.
        Sure that’s still speculative but as an influence, as something that might play a part or a link in a chain of thought or reasoning then it is perfectly reasonable to make such a conjecture. The point here is to identify the offending line of thought and not condemn everybody who might ever had such a thought – we are all sabbateans in some sense since we live and breathe anti-nomianism relative to previous systems of belief in our every day lives.
        The article by the renegade Gilad Atzmon was actually prompted by a Daily Mail article about (uncorroborated) claims that Weinstein had actually expressed the belief that he was a “saviour” born to change the world (i.e. make it more feminist for women or something). Not sure I believe its true, but people sometimes rationalise misdeeds, particularly under pressure

        1. Religious studies is one of my specialties, and I actually have a good background in what Sabbateanism was all about. The capsule summary is that Shabbatai Zvi suffered from a bad case of bipolar disorder, had lots of odd mystical ideas, and many people believed him before it became obvious that he was crackers. After he turned Muslim (to save his ass), all that was rejected except for a few fringe sects.
          My thoughts are that Reform Judaism is Protestant-influenced, just that. It’s not my brand of religion, but I don’t see anything wrong with those who believe it sincerely.
          I doubt Mr. Weinstein takes religion too seriously. (Any old perv can contribute DNA evidence to a potted plant without a spiritual motive or a history of similar practices, right?) My informal observations are that the “bad apples” tend to be either completely secular, or just going through the motions. The spiritual instinct is there, but if it’s not rooted in positive traditions, it can go off into strange tangents.
          Likely Weinstein’s idea of changing the world has to do with political goals that sound good to him (even if he isn’t exactly embodying the change he seeks). This may be similar in concept to “tikkun olam”, but there are non-religious motives too for wanting to make the world a better place. There’s nothing wrong with improving the world, so long as it’s not attempted with destructive and counterproductive means like Communism, cultural Marxism, or other baloney like that.

      2. Judaism and Christianity have always been in a conversation of sorts, however fractious and full of misunderstandings. Religious movements are often syncretic. That will include reform judaism, and going back sabbateanism itself. Scholem saw the influence of christianity in sabbateanism – particularly in the messianic shape that it took, although that was both emulation and negation. The personality Sabbatai Tzvi himself is of debatable importance beyond the broad shape of his – antinomian – theology and declarative acts – strange deeds (he put a fish in swaddling clothes into a baby’s cradle for instance) and of course the famous conversion to islam itself, but his impact on progressive judaism was critical in permitting it to break free of the restrictions of orthodoxy, including with regard to messianism. Judaism is monotheism, and some – in fact a great many – have seen a potential for a kind of radical monotheism in the new age that Sabbatai Tzvi saw himself as ushering in.
        Obviously he was a massively controversial and divisive figure, and there is a tragic and somewhat embarrassing subsequent history attached to his tale. For that reason – and more esoteric ones – people who were influenced by Sabbateanism, or even thought he really was the messiah – have not always been ready to admit to the fact. Gerschom Schole himself was likely a Sabbatean if his friend Walter Benjamin is to be believed – and who would be better able to say. But its not the sort of thing one blurts out
        As for Weinstein, as I’ve already indicated I’m not claiming he has ever considered himself to be a sabbatian, or anything like that – there is no evidence for such a thing. I am saying that the particular act he engaged in is arguably identifiable, that it has a clear antinomian, probably sabbatian signature – and that even if his actions were those of an outlier and in no way typical of those around him that kind of behavior (consciously or unconsciously anti-nomian) was available to him as part of an alternative rejected tradition (and repertoire of behaviours) that has never completely gone away. The guy in the article you linked to recognised it. The article got pulled because its difficult to discuss without right wingers starting to froth at the mouth.
        “This may be similar in concept to “tikkun olam”, but there are non-religious motives too for wanting to make the world a better place. There’s nothing wrong with improving the world”
        Sure, but exactly the same factors apply. Tikkun is a quite specific concept. Its not just niceness, or loving kindness or whatever – it’s specifically about repairing the world. Sometimes that means the soul, sometimes that means repairing God (a strange idea for christians) and sometimes the two run in parallel. Modern jews may have virtually no understanding of such concepts, but again they are available within the ideological repertoire. Given the influence progressive jews have had in the history of progressive movements it would probably be impossible to disentangle more conventionally christian or jewish enlightenment (haskalah) notions of progress from theological concepts of tikkun – they feed into each other. When it comes to feminism though, I think we can go further than. Sabbatianism is arguably one of the major un-acknowledged sources of modern feminism. Firstly it argued for – virtual – equality between men and women, and secondly it did so because it recognised a female diety within something like a triune Godhead. In Sabbateanism you get women rising to the top. There are other occult influences in the origins of feminism, but Sabbateanism is certainly one of them, and given the anti-nomian revolutionary course radical feminism has taken it would be foolish to underestimate its influence on feminism, and probably on Weinstein’s feminism too

    2. MM2
      You sound like a feminist. There is nothing wrong with a bit of coercion to get a girl in your bed. What salesman/banker/religion doesn’t use coercion as part of the deal?

      1. forcefulness / leadership is different from physical coercion / force. You’re not going to get very far these days without making a distinction in that regard, and indeed if you fail to do so it is the feminists, ever keen to conflate the two, who will be thanking you, for you will have made their case for them

  4. I don’t know about you hombres, but this commenting system is SUPER sensitive to certain words.
    Whenever I use any form of the word c.u.c.k., the comment is instantly deleted.
    I’m sure there’s other words too.
    What’s the bet the software was “managed” by a woman?
    “You can’t have that word, that’s OFFENSIVE!!!!”

      1. Well thank you for proving that. I guess it must just be me. Because I’m not lying; if I use any variation of the word c.u.c.k, my comment will not post. And I keep having to change my name because my accounts invariable get banned after a certain time.
        Btw I didn’t realize hombre meant homo, I thought it was just a hip way of saying dude in N.American vernacular.

    1. Cuck, cuck, cuck-a-doodle-doo
      Just disproved your theory. And don’t call me an “hombre” you homo.

  5. Yes. Sitting down tied up in a dark room and having videos of Andrea Dworkin playing for a week will cure anyone of ‘sex addiction’

    1. I would imaging a good virtual reality program of the Hildebeast prancing around promising to do deviant sexual things to a man would frighten his libido so much that he might be permanently psychologically scarred and NEVER get up again!

  6. All this is just bullshit attacking men for their natural sexual desires and trying to weaken them. More fuckery from feminism.
    I’m seeing shit now like “oh this celebrity said I had a nice ass” wah..
    So fucking what, stupid attention whores coming out of the woodwork.

    1. given that he’s admitted half of what he’s accused of, and may well be found guilty of rape / physical assault, then that’s a dubious line to take. That doesn’t mean that in many cases there wasn’t some kind of quid pro quo going on, but clearly even within that framework of supposedly mutual understanding, most of these women were not prepared to sleep with him

      1. If I understand what you are saying then- does not matter. We now have to accept an abnormal duality in which women are even better warriors then men (the new “Star Wars” movies, for example), yet are at the same time eternal victims like in a pirate-seizes-the-young-innocent-maiden novel written in the Victorian Age.
        These women could have said “no” and walked away with honor intact. They didn’t. There wouldn’t even be a scandal therefore except for that duality; it would be all but impossible for even the media to portray them as “heroes” if they were also so empowered all along.

        1. that dual reality is hypocrisy but its mainly to do with the fact that they are working to change ‘representations’ i.e. how people think about women (strong / independent not weak and vulnerable). Obviously they are weak and vulnerable most of the time, which they know full well so they insist upon trying to create a world in keeping with their fantasy politics. The reality is as it’s always been: someone the size of Weinstein, and with the power of Weinstein can pretty much do what he wants. He’s not a traditional type rapist, at least to the extent that he didn’t use physical force (there is some suggestion he might have done on one or two occasions) but he does bully and cajole and in the modern world for right or wrong that raises issues of consent. There are further complicating factors: the possibility that he might also have blackmailed or threatened some. He’s not a nice guy, although if he’s convicted it needs to be for a whole lot more than that

        2. Not bad points Michaelmobius2, but this was obviously just a case of women who wanted something bad enough to accept the conditions.
          If what you say is true then once again, even after half a century of hard feminism, women are still victims: therefore NOW and other feminists (Boomers) have failed miserably.
          The problem the media has is that most people are no longer buying into it. Therefore they have to add the “forced” part to make it work; remember this is the same media that eagerly pushed the absurd Rolling Stone rape hoax.
          If so much as one nubile young lady said “forget it creep” and walked out, then the whole victim narrative falls apart.
          As for “consent:” you actually showed a problem here: making “consent” so vague rape is inevitable no matter what. This is why “consent contracts” at colleges are a bad joke: all the woman has to do is say she was “coerced” in any way and it becomes useless.

  7. That’s the dream, making empty gesture acts of contrition so you can get bitches to watch you shower again. Proof that America works baby!

  8. Don’t see Weinstein as guilty of anything.
    They were whores and they got paid plenty for letting him bang them.
    I would have done it too (given the chance).

    1. JOHN
      Celebrities who go to whores in the US or UK take a huge risk because the Madam will usually get busted and reel off all her famous clients like the House of Lords in UK.
      You can go the Hugh Grant route and seek a street whore nobody would believe anyhow for quick blowjob BUT if you are caught then like Grant or Michael in LA it is front-page.

  9. Most of it is an attempt by some unknowns or has-been actresses to get a few more minutes on film.

  10. Once again idiots.. THE WHOLE THING IS FAKE. Technically claims of grab-ass in Hollywood TWENTY years ago are not actionable. The sketchy “accusers” are used up trannies acting out a “reality” script. The TRUE purpose of this wave of falsity is obviously the weaponizing of “female points finger and it is made so”. No one will be able to legally challenge a bitch and her psycho fantasies! Additionally the (((old guard of Hollywood))) seems to be taking these condemnations as an ‘early retirement’ siphoning all sorts of cash back to the middle east where they came from. Combine the NFL knee-taking with this witch hunt phase and you should realize the Deep State Obama-Soros reign of terror is still in place. Expect even greater curbs of your freedom by more social disasters soon.

    1. It’s gone beyond that, my friend. The politically correct giving this its power, even those higher-ups who once may have been behind what you say- assuming it is that- now genuinely believe it themselves. We’ve gone past the point where radical feminism is used by opportunists; liberalism as we know it today had become a religion with fanatical believers who require their own Devil. Guess what that will be?
      Many of these white males are being attacked by the monster they helped create. Bernie Sanders was robbed of his nomination by feminists who just wanted a woman in the White House. Weinstein, Maher, other whites and male feminists like the ones in academia- they are in the crosshairs too.

    1. He’s just a typical kike who needs to bribe women to f!ck him, at least when he’s not raping potted plants.
      What a White guy can get for free using raw courage, a kike can only get using bribes and subterfuge. So alpha man, I’m in awe… lol
      Just listen to the tapes–the (((guy))) is practically haggling the bitch to screw him. It’s bazaar talk, not game.
      Anyway, our women are total whores and the day we create a White Taliban will be a miraculous day of united joy and rejuvenation.

      1. Fabo, the Germans have an old saying, Geld regiert die Welt. Roughly translated, Money governs the worlds affairs….

  11. The huge focus on abusers of women, is nothing more than a strategy to stop the more serious and totally documented tragedy of pedophilia, which Hollywood among other entities is probably totally steeped in.

  12. I was unclear. I meant the focus on grown women, is being done to keep attention away from the world wide pedophilia crises… Don’t kid yourselves.

  13. Harvey Weinstein isn’t a sex addict. He’s a regular man with some terrible game/sexual strategy.

  14. If anyone had any doubts about how “gynocentric” America has become this whole fiasco should remove them.
    These women, the so-called “silence breakers,” for all the media worship, are not heroes. They knowing did what they did because they wanted what people like Weinstein had to offer. He did not force any of them like an actual rapist would.
    So- they got their fame and fortune, years later when it’s safe and fashionable to do so they complain about it, and- showing how things pander to feminism…
    By now complaining about being “victims” they are put on mountaintops as HEROES!
    You know who the media will NOT focus on? The women who got up, said “no way creep,” and just walked away. Because if the media did then these “courageous womyn” suddenly won’t look so heroic.
    Meanwhile Hollywood and the media still remains mostly silent about Roman Polanski and his underage victim whom was a victim because she couldn’t just walk away.
    But there is even more to this. Let’s say one of these “heroes” is 40 years old now. She would have been born in 1977. Thus, upon turning 18, it would have been the mid-1990s when feminism was in full gear. With younger “heroes” it would have been even later than that. If women are still such victims after decades of NOW and radical feminism, even in situations where simply saying no and walking away will do nicely, then it’s about time aging feminist Baby Boomers admit they and their movement are total failures. After all, if after over half a century such things are worse than ever (if one listens to them) then what else can they be but utter losers?
    Point this out and watch the cognitive dissonance set in…

  15. Another thing- the next logical step will be demands for more women in important positions in the (entertainment) media as a way of making up for this “crisis.” So on the plus side at least maybe now Hollywood will ruin itself since we know compared to the garbage that will be churned out in the future what we have now will look like real quality classics.

Comments are closed.