Stand by your man

[LaFemme]

Two hugely powerful men each with famous wives, were exposed as men who used their power to sexually harass and assault women. Harvey Weinstein and Les Moonves each taken down for similar issues.

Harvey’s wife, Georgina Chapmen, took their children and divorced him immediately; Les’ wife, Julie Chen, made a public stance of support, left her job on “The View” and stayed (so far).

What would you do when confronted with such irrefutable proof? Woman after woman coming forward. What if (and assuming it would) affect your employability?

I’m reminded of a quote (although I can’t remember where it comes from): Just because he didn’t do it to you, doesn’t mean he didn’t do it to her.

 

[MickeyLee]

I'd leave. I would honestly be scared of the kind of person who could fool me so completely and live this double life of assaulting and denigrating women. Based solely on self-preservation I would head to the hills. Cuz the fucker who gets by me with his bullshit is serial killer material. *shudder*

Sisterhood also demands I beat his ass to a pulp before I walk out.

Even if it fucked up my job. Even if I lost friends and my second family.

Some things can not be forgiven. Repeated transgressions must be met with unflinching disapproval and distancing.

 

[Tight_N_Juicy]

I would get so dark and fucked up, I don't want to go into detail...

It would be the end of my life. (Not literally...)

 

[693987]

I would get so dark and fucked up, I don't want to go into detail...

It would be the end of my life. (Not literally...)

^ This. Rem has been my best friend and a solid amazing presence in my life for a long time...

 

[918177]

Divorce and personal damage control would be the only option.

I know in some states in America a married person can't testify against their spouse
so a divorce would open the doors for her to fully cooperate and help detectives in any way possible
including handing over all computers, hand held devices, files etc.
I personally would ensure that my complete cooperation was linked with the absolute understanding
that I had nothing to do with his crimes and I (and any children of the union) were sheltered from
the legal fall-out.

In short I'd throw that fucker under the bus.

 

[LaFemme]

I would get so dark and fucked up, I don't want to go into detail...

It would be the end of my life. (Not literally...)

^ This. Rem has been my best friend and a solid amazing presence in my life for a long time...

I totally get this. It would completely turn shake the foundation of my world, make me doubt my judgement in people. I’d get dark. But I’d have no choice - I’d be out. And to be an example to any children involved that behaviour like that cannot be condoned as it’s abusive and demeaning. Staying just gives him a haven where things are okay. He doesn’t deserve that and won’t learn from that.

 

[693987]

I totally get this. It would completely turn shake the foundation of my world, make me doubt my judgement in people. I’d get dark. But I’d have no choice - I’d be out. And to be an example to any children involved that behaviour like that cannot be condoned as it’s abusive and demeaning. Staying just gives him a haven where things are okay. He doesn’t deserve that and won’t learn from that.

Indeed. Rem knows there are certain things I will not forgive and that would result in me leaving. He has a list of things like that too.

 

[Tight_N_Juicy]

I totally get this. It would completely turn shake the foundation of my world, make me doubt my judgement in people. I’d get dark. But I’d have no choice - I’d be out. And to be an example to any children involved that behaviour like that cannot be condoned as it’s abusive and demeaning. Staying just gives him a haven where things are okay. He doesn’t deserve that and won’t learn from that.

I've known him literally my entire life. If I found out he was a predator and I never knew...

I would get violent. Probably towards him and myself.

I just.... I couldn't be ok ever again.

 

[deleted848353]

I'd leave him

 

[AlteredEgo]

I know in some states in America a married person can't testify against their spouse
so a divorce would open the doors for her to fully cooperate and help detectives in any way possible

It's not that they can't testify, it's that they cannot be forced to testify.

I would leave. On my way out, I would take everything I could. I would be extremely punative if I believed.

 

[EllieP]

We actually had this conversation the other evening, and he's the one who brought it up. He told me that I would never have to stand by his side because he hasn't done anything that he needs to publicly apologize for.

I told him he was right - I'd never stand behind him if he had to publicly apologize for anything illegal or immoral. I don't do that.

You're the big boy who screwed up; you're on your own.

Would I leave him? If he cheated without question I would boot him out. I'm not leaving because I didn't do anything wrong. But if I was made to leave you can bet I wouldn't leave much behind.

Yes, we've had this conversation before on a few occasions. I told him I love him so never give me a reason to stop.

 

[918177]

It's not that they can't testify, it's that they cannot be forced to testify.

I would leave. On my way out, I would take everything I could. I would be extremely punative if I believed.

That's really interesting and thank you for the info.

I appreciate it.

 

[Holly Doors]

I think I'd be so bitter and twisted I'd have trouble controlling it, for sure I'd be making sure I did everything in my power to ruin the weasel. That aside I'd be divorcing and taking control of any children and whatever finances I could, I don't know anything about US marriage laws but over here in the UK things like prenuptial agreements don't exist in our laws, assuming I'd been married for more than 2 years I'd be taking half of everything and making sure I was kept in the lifestyle I was accustomed to. Once the legality was over I'd have a campaign to make sure nobody ever forgot what the asshole did!
Times are changing, it's always been common knowledge over here that if an actor/actress wanted to get on in the BBC they'd have to be prepared to bend over or open their legs! For years the BBC was it's own institution and only answered to itself. in the last decade it's been held to account exposing the cover up of many accounts of sexual favors for promotion even horrible stuff like the abuse of children by Sir Jimmy Savel, Rolf Harris etc.
Also one big turning point was the sacking of Jeremy Clarkson for beating up his producers, a few years ago it would have been his producer getting the sack because Clarkson had a disagreement with him and probably never worked in the industry again.
Another thing that's come to light within the BBC is the undeniable gulf between levels of pay between genders, pay equality came in over here in the 70's ffs.
Their are still many however who think the BBC should have been left alone being a law unto itself, untouchable by the legal system. the mind boggles!

 

[AlteredEgo]

but over here in the UK things like prenuptial agreements don't exist in our laws,

Yes they do. An heiress married a banker and her pre-nup was accepted as evidence in 2010, setting case law precident. Judges can and do set the agreements aside at their discretion, bit they do so here as well. In the UK, your prenuptial agreements are binding, as long as they are fair.

I think of it this way, myself. Whether you have one drawn and signed or not, you have one. You either have the one you chose, or the one the government chose.

Have you seen Top Gear? I would have beaten his producers too. Loved that show, but the producers gave zero fucks about the safety and wellness if the presenters.