精品东京热,精品动漫无码,精品动漫一区,精品动漫一区二区,精品动漫一区二区三区,精品二三四区,精品福利导航,精品福利導航。

We need to talk about a trend that appears to be shinuki sex videoemerging in Hollywood's post-Weinstein era. The era which declared Time's Up on harassment and abuse.

It's a gesture that has the power to enact a tangible change in the industry, but it's important it's not hijacked by those in need of a quick PR fix when they find themselves in the midst of a controversy.

I'm talking about Hollywood men donating their salaries to charity after they find themselves in the midst of a public outcry.

Take Mark Wahlberg's recent actions. He found himself the centre of a scandal after it emerged that his All The Money In The World co-star Michelle Williams was paid less than 1 percent of his hefty reshooting fee following the re-casting of Kevin Spacey. To save you the maths, Williams earned a mere $1,000, compared to Wahlberg's $1.5 million for the reshoots. After Spacey was accused of sexual misconduct and harassment, director Ridley Scott decided to recast Christopher Plummer in his role, and reshoot all of Spacey's scenes.

And, as if this pay discrepancy wasn't egregious enough, USA Todaysubsequently claimed Wahlberg had "co-star approval" in his contract and "refused" to approve Plummer's casting unless he was paid for the re-shoot. If the report is true, Wahlberg essentially dragged his heels in order to profit from sexual harassment allegations.

So, what did Wahlberg do when he found himself the subject of widespread criticism from his Hollywood peers, and an eruption of public outcry? He announced he would donate the money he earned to Time's Up legal defence fund in his co-star Michelle Williams' name.

Wahlberg's statement, which he posted on Twitter and Instagram, was met with some applause and praise, but many people are, rightly, still upset. But, it's this praise that I'm having a hard time digesting.

Trawling through Twitter, the words "very generous," "didn't do anything wrong," and even "real man speaking up for equality," have been applied to Wahlberg's gesture. But, I just don't buy it. Yes, Wahlberg did the right thing. It's a start. But, this donation was little more than a PR stunt made in reaction to his public fall from grace. A last-ditch effort to retrieve his personal brand from a precipice.

I'm not alone in feeling this way. Actress Aidy Bryant hit the nail on the head on SNL's "Weekend Update" when she slammed Wahlberg for only doing the right thing after being found out.

"That's great, that's the right thing to do," said Bryant. "But, it would be so cool if it didn't take a week-long public shaming to do the right thing. Maybe do a daily private shaming which is what I have done my entire damn life."

"Fuck people praising Mark Wahlberg for his 'donation.' Do you think he did it out of the goodness of his heart? No, he did it because he found himself in the center of controversy," wrote one woman on Twitter.

This Tweet is currently unavailable. It might be loading or has been removed.

Some even say that Wahlberg should have never asked to be paid that money under the circumstances of the re-shoot.

This Tweet is currently unavailable. It might be loading or has been removed.

By contrast, this symbolic gesture—when not used as just an empty PR stunt—can also be a way of making amends, and set an example to others in the industry, as Timothée Chalamet demonstrated this week.

This week, Call Me By Your Namestar Timothée Chalamet announced in an Instagram post that he'd be donating the money earned for his role in upcoming Woody Allen movie A Rainy Day in New York.Chalamet's decision came after co-stars Griffin Newman and Rebecca Hall announced they'd be donating their salaries from the film to charity.

In his statement, he wrote that he'll give his salary to the Time's Up campaign, the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network (RAINN), and New York's LGBT Center. Chalamet wrote that he was unable to say more about Allen due to "contractual obligations," but he proffered this: "I don't want to profit from my work on the film."

Woody Allen was accused of molesting his then-7-year-old daughter Dylan Farrow in 1992. These allegations were in 2014 reiterated by Farrow in an open letter in the New York Times,in which she urged the entertainment industry to take action and hold Allen accountable (he denies the allegation). Despite her words, Allen's illustrious career carried on regardless.

Chalamet's decision to donate his salary and distance himself from Woody Allen is a good, and much needed, start in an industry that's largely turned a blind eye on the allegations against Allen. Gestures like Chalamet's and his costars' are precisely what Farrow is hoping to see during the Me Too and Time's Up movement.

In an interview with Gayle King on CBS This Morning, Farrow said she wasn't angry with people starring in Allen's movies, but she is hopeful that they can hold themselves accountable. "I hope that, you know, especially since so many of them have been vocal advocates of this Me Too and Time's Up movement that they can acknowledge their complicity and maybe hold themselves accountable to how they have perpetuated this culture of silence in their industry," Farrow told King.

For Chalamet, who is unable to fully speak out against Allen due to "contractual obligations," the donation of his salary is his only option to make amends. And, it does appear to be a genuine one.

As Dylan Farrow tweeted Jan. 7, "no predator should be spared by virtue of their 'talent' or 'creativity' or 'genius.'"

This Tweet is currently unavailable. It might be loading or has been removed.

If the donation of one's salary is a way to make real amends for complicity in a system that has permitted talent to protect them from the consequences of allegations, then we need to ensure it is not used—like in Wahlberg's case—as a way to cleanse your public image after being publicly shamed.

All we can do here is hope that others will follow Chalamet, Hall, and Newman's suit. And, hope that Hollywood will apply, as Farrow says, the principles of the Time's Up movement consistently and "without exemption."