Now that Harvey Weinstein has been kicked out of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Watch Exotic Forbidden Pleasures OnlineSciences, the obvious question presents itself: What now?
While Weinstein is an unusually high-profile figure whose identity was closely tied with the Oscars, he certainly wasn't the only person accused of predatory behavior within the Academy's ranks. Bill Cosby remains a member of the Academy, for example, as does Roman Polanski.
Does it follow, then, that they'll be kicked out too? Or will the "ethical standards of conduct" only apply going forward? For that matter, will there actually be a new code of conduct, or will the organization quietly carry on as it always has?
SEE ALSO: Harvey Weinstein expelled from motion picture academyIn a statement announcing the decision over the weekend, the AMPAS board of governors wrote that it hoped to "send a message that the era of willful ignorance and shameful complicity in sexually predatory behavior and workplace harassment in our industry is over."
The board additionally hinted at a possible policy change, writing that it was "work[ing] to establish ethical standards of conduct that all Academy members will be expected to exemplify."
As for what that actually means? Here are three possible outcomes, and the pros and cons of both.
Why it should happen:According to the board, the vote to oust Weinstein was "well in excess of the required two-thirds majority." In other words, feelings were strong. It's easy to see why: Who wouldn'twant to boot an accused serial sexual predator and known bully from their organization? (Well – aside from everyone who already knew what Weinstein was and did nothing about it until the public found out. But we'll get to them.)
And why stop at removing just one person? A widespread purge would shine a light on other monsters hiding within the industry, and send a strong message that Hollywood is changing for real. It'd demonstrate the professional consequences of such heinous misconduct, and double as a show of support for those who were victimized and terrorized.
Why it probably won't:This is going to be really tricky to implement. The board would have to figure out which alleged crimes are over the line, then privately go through its secretive list of more than 6,000 people to determine who gets the boot. Even if it used an outside organization for this process, people are bound to take issue.
The bigger issue for the Academy, though, may be that its members are hiding a whole lot of other skeletons in their closets. The Weinstein allegations have already led to accusations against Ben Affleck, Oliver Stone, Lars von Trier, and Amazon Studios head Roy Price; it's hard to imagine Hollywood agreeing to a process that might expose still more misdeeds.
Why it could happen:Let's say the Academy introduces "ethical standards" that only apply from this point on. In theory, this would send the message that behavior like Weinstein's will not be tolerated, while relieving existing members of the worry that their own ugly histories could be exposed. It should, therefore, be less messy and more palatable than trying to apply the rules retroactively.
Moreover, this should gradually weed out predators and bullies. Either they'll stay on their best behavior or violate the rules and be kicked out as a result (assuming they are enforced). Meanwhile, up-and-coming artists with a checkered history could be barred from ever joining to begin with.
Why it's a disappointing idea:The Academy will still face the problem of determining who's guilty of what, which it is ill-equipped to do — but will also face accusations of inconsistency from both sides, since Weinstein will be an exception to the Academy's own rules.
It also sends a much, much weaker message than a more thorough house-cleaning would. Sure, these new rules could make a big impact, eventually, in theory, maybe. But they won't necessarily do much to alleviate the situation now — or ever. If the membership stays exactly the same minus one Harvey Weinstein, who's to say the Academy won't slip back into its old ways of turning blind eyes?
Why it might happen:Obviously, the easiest course of action for the Academy to take would be to quietly do nothing at all. It has already made a public show of concern by expelling Weinstein. Maybe if its leadership wrings their hands and looks anguished for a while, public attention will move on before they have to make any tough decisions.
Why it shouldn't:Just as obviously, this would do very little to fix the real problem, which extends far beyond Weinstein. Kicking him out was a good start, but that's all it was – a start. If the Academy stops now, it's doing nothing to change the culture that allowed someone like Weinstein to fester within it for so long to begin with.
In the past few weeks, celebrity after celebrity has spoken up to say they support the victims, that they want to stop this epidemic of abuse, that they're determined to make sure that their industry does better. If they meant even half of what they said, they must know that doing nothing is unacceptable — and that the rest of us will be watching and waiting for them to do anything at all.
Taylor Swift won her fourth Grammy for Album of the Year, makes historyChasing It Down the Elevator Shaft to the Subconscious: Or, Getting Hypnotized by Jeremy ButmanThe Apple Watch Series 9 is $100 off at Amazon and WalmartStory Time by Cynthia ZarinAnne Elliot Is TwentyApple Vision Pro teardown: What's inside the $3,500 headsetThe Nine Ways: On the Enneagram by Jacob RubinFive Letters from Seamus Heaney by Seamus HeaneyBetween the World and the Universe, a Woman Is Thinking by Sara NicholsonAnthe: On Translating Kannada by Deepa BhasthiTrump's favorite techie thinks there should be 'more open debate' on global warmingTinder releases new warnings to stop inappropriate messagesBetween the World and the Universe, a Woman Is Thinking by Sara NicholsonOn Being Warlike by Joyelle McSweeneyBook as Enemy by Adania ShibliDorm Room Art?: At the Biennale by Camille JacobsonOld Friends by Devon Brody“Choose Hope or Despair”: On John Shoptaw by Jenny OdellTrump's favorite techie thinks there should be 'more open debate' on global warmingMark Zuckerberg wants to be like Augustus Caesar. How close is he? Regal Cinemas owner confirms it's weighing the closure of US locations Chrissy Teigen gets really real about 'period skin' Why the next presidential debate could totally be on Zoom You definitely can't buy this Harry Potter In praise of going back to bed after taking a shower The far right has a new conspiracy theory about how the DNC was hacked Prince William and Sir David Attenborough launch £50 million environmentalism prize John McCain is the Severus Snape of Washington now, apparently Election breakdown: What happened on Instagram Sept. 29 Snake owner calls 911: 'I have a boa constrictor stuck to my face' 5 things I noticed during my 24 hours with Google's Nest Audio 20 books from 2020 that make great gifts The COVID crash: Why 150 million people could enter extreme poverty by 2022 Trump just can't seem to make his mind up about China J.K. Rowling apologizes for her tweets about Donald Trump and child in a wheelchair 11 gifts to get kids interested in STEM 'Cadence of Hyrule' developers reflect on making a Zelda rhythm game Google now has a much better way to alert you to critical security issues David Denman shares what it was like playing Roy on 'The Office' Florida's voter registration website failed miserably on night of deadline
2.221s , 10161.5703125 kb
Copyright © 2025 Powered by 【Watch Exotic Forbidden Pleasures Online】,Exquisite Information Network