Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
As far as film roles go, she took a starring role in a huge HBO before all this, and was in Frozen 2 before all this, both of which are bigger than anything she’d done recently and especially since, so where’s the career boost?
And as far as evidence goes, what evidence would you like the police to have found at Manson’s house of him drugging her and raping her in her sleep years prior?
I’m not pronouncing him guilty. You’re the one making the verdict, and it’s gross. You’re blaming the victim and writing her off, and it’s gross.
Again, tell me why this fits your theory. Why would a jilted ex girlfriend go through the process of sharing her story without naming him, go to congress to try to fight for laws that better protect victims of sexual abuse, and start a non-profit to protect other survivors of sexual abuse… all before ever mentioning his name? How does that fit the jilted ex girlfriend spotting an easy mark and looking for a career boost narrative? Please do tell!
|
You don't know who the victim is here so get off your high horse. You know what's gross? Looking to be Captain Morals on a message board. If she had no intentions of making it a non profit thing why did she eventually mention his name? If these things were happening why was she totally in board with him for so long? She says he sexually raped her during a video that multiple people who were on set have stated is simply not true. Neither you nor I have all the facts, you theorize you are right and you believe her story, I have a different theory and you say I am victim blaming. Maybe in actuality you are victim blaming. Again, let it play out in the courts.