Marcus B wrote:I think valium (as in the novelization) may have been a better thing to mention as I think it's given to calm people down or help them sleep.. which Dana may have had if she had seen a doctor after her experiences.
That makes sense, they used to prescribe Valium a lot more readily, and besides I assume it would be much easier giving a demon a Valium pill instead of a Thorazine injection. I don't imagine trying to inject a demon with anything would go over too well...
JurorNo.2 wrote:So, lol, apparently I am defending predatory behavior by defending Ghostbusters. This coming from actual "fans." Even though I've been a victim myself. (Note: This didn't happen here. Another fansite, though I use that term loosely.)
I am finally, and officially, done with this fandom.
That really, really too bad to hear. I hope you stick around on this forum, you're nice to talk to.
And I just emailed Cracked that their article trivialized a serious issue and if they can't distinguish between reality and a movie, they are of no help to women at all.
Exactly, this article does more harm than good. How are we supposed to take the real cases seriously when we are tearing down characters whose only existence is on the screen or in print.
I'll probably get some flak for saying this, but I think some cases are misunderstandings/overreactions. We need to be able to distinguish between serial abusers or harassers (such as
President Donald Trump, Harvey Weinstein, Charlie Rose, and the like) and people who have one off offences and may or may not have done anything seriously wrong, especially not career ending (such as Woody Allen and Garrison Keillor). There are different levels, and by treating the levels the same in media and in the response to them, it makes it harder to take the really bad cases seriously.