# data[].attributes.body
Who is/are the speakers?

Black Civil Rights activist in NY who founded the METOO movement.

What’s their expertise and/or connection to their material?

She founded this phrase years ago in her  work with victims. That phrase has now become popularized  and powerful through the movement. She started her career in Selma as an activist who founded various organizations and movements. She was also a consultant on the film Selma. Alma Matter Auburn University.

What is the format of the information?

Twitter thread...small bursts or statements. The tweets require us to dig in further to the links, etc. to access longer information. The tweet is personal and limited. Information is not cited (but can be linked at times to cited information). But not all the links are vetted for information. Non peer reviewed piece of language (but does interact with community of networked clusters)...Therefore, it also offers an alternative to academic work/writing (or a new kind of academic work) which allows more voices to be heard/explored. But information is often quick and therefore can be controversial. The swiftness of the medium can appeal to the emotional. Can be stream of consciousness and of the moment. While it is an open medium and invites many voices, it can also be driven by the popular (who gets retweeted, number of followers, etc.).

The best and worst of communication (free speech??).

Opens communication dialogues up (but also organizes that information through algorithms and hierarchies of information).

How does format influence your perception of what they’re saying? Do you think this source has authority on your research topic? Why or why not?

See our previous answer.

How is power (as it relates to gender, race, or otherwise) evidenced or discussed in your source?
The power of the tweet is its capacity to go "viral"...but this can mean that the ideas take on a life of their own in the virtual transmission.
Select a quote or passage you might cite in your research paper. What is it? Why did you choose it?

" A year ago today I thought my world was falling apart. I woke up to find out that the hashtag #metoo had gone viral and I didn't see any of the work I laid out over the previous decade attached to it. I thought for sure I would be erased from a thing I worked so hard to build "  From "Tweet"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
My hope is that as more folks come forward, particularly men, that we prepare ourselves for some hard conversations about power and humanity and privilege and harm. This issue is less about crime & punishment and more about harm and harm reduction.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Thread by @TaranaBurke: "I've said repeatedly that the is for all of us, including these brave young men who are now coming forward. It will continue to b [...]" #metooMVMT

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Thread by @TaranaBurke: "I've said repeatedly that the is for all of us, including these brave young men who are now coming forward. It will jarring when we hear the names of some of our faves connected to sexual violence unless we shift f [...]" #metooMVMT

# data[].attributes.body
Who is/are the speakers?

What’s their expertise and/or connection to their material?

What is the format of the information?

How does format influence your perception of what they’re saying? Do you think this source has authority on your research topic? Why or why not?

How is power (as it relates to gender, race, or otherwise) evidenced or discussed in your source?

Select a quote or passage you might cite in your research paper. What is it? Why did you choose it?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Harvey Weinstein was a passionate cinephile, a risk taker, a patron of talent in film, a loving father and a monster.

For years, he was my monster.

This fall, I was approached by reporters, through different sources, including my dear friend Ashley Judd, to speak about an episode in my life that, although painful, I thought I had made peace with.

I had brainwashed myself into thinking that it was over and that I had survived; I hid from the responsibility to speak out with the excuse that enough people were already involved in shining a light on my monster. I didn't consider my voice important, nor did I think it would make a difference.

In reality, I was trying to save myself the challenge of explaining several things to my loved ones: Why, when I had casually mentioned that I had been bullied like many others by Harvey, I had excluded a couple of details. And why, for so many years, we have been cordial to a man who hurt me so deeply. I had been proud of my capacity for forgiveness, but the mere fact that I was ashamed to describe the details of what I had forgiven made me wonder if that chapter of my life had really been resolved.

When so many women came forward to describe what Harvey had done to them, I had to confront my cowardice and humbly accept that my story, as important as it was to me, was nothing but a drop in an ocean of sorrow and confusion. I felt that by now nobody would care about my pain - maybe this was an effect of the many times I was told, especially by Harvey, that I was nobody.

We are finally becoming conscious of a vice that has been socially accepted and has insulted and humiliated millions of girls like me, for in every woman there is a girl. I am inspired by those who had the courage to speak out, especially in a society that elected a president who has been accused of sexual harassment and assault by more than a dozen women and whom we have all heard make a statement about how a man in power can do anything he wants to women.

Well, not anymore.

In the 14 years that I stumbled from schoolgirl to Mexican soap star to an extra in a few American films to catching a couple of lucky breaks in "Desperado" and "Fools Rush In," Harvey Weinstein had become the wizard of a new wave of cinema that took original content into the mainstream. At the same time, it was unimaginable for a Mexican actress to aspire to a place in Hollywood. And even though I had proven them wrong, I was still a nobody.

One of the forces that gave me the determination to pursue my career was the story of Frida Kahlo, who in the golden age of the Mexican muralists would do small intimate paintings that everybody looked down on. She had the courage to express herself while disregarding skepticism. My greatest ambition was to tell her story. It became my mission to portray the life of this extraordinary artist and to show my native Mexico in a way that combated stereotypes.

The Weinstein empire, which was then Miramax, had become synonymous with quality, sophistication and risk taking - a haven for artists who were complex and defiant. It was everything that Frida was to me and everything I aspired to be.

I had started a journey to produce the film with a different company, but I fought to get it back to take it to Harvey.

I knew him a little bit through my relationship with the director Robert Rodriguez and the producer Elizabeth Avellan, who was then his wife, with whom I had done several films and who had taken me under their wing. All I knew of Harvey at the time was that he had a remarkable intellect, he was a loyal friend and a family man.

Knowing what I know now, I wonder if it wasn't my friendship with them - and Quentin Tarantino and George Clooney - that saved me from being raped.

The deal we made initially was that Harvey would pay for the rights of work I had already developed. As an actress, I would be paid the minimum Screen Actors Guild scale plus 10 percent. As a producer, I would receive a credit that would not yet be defined, but no payment, which was not that rare for a female producer in the '90s. He also demanded a signed deal for me to do several other films with Miramax, which I thought would cement my status as a leading lady.

I did not care about the money; I was so excited to work with him and that company. In my naïveté, I thought my dream had come true. He had validated the last 14 years of my life. He had taken a chance on me - a nobody. He had said yes.

Little did I know it would become my turn to say no.

No to opening the door to him at all hours of the night, hotel after hotel, location after location, where he would show up unexpectedly, including one location where I was doing a movie he wasn't even involved with.

No to me taking a shower with him.

No to letting him watch me take a shower.

No to letting him give me a massage.

No to letting a naked friend of his give me a massage.

No to letting him give me oral sex.

No to my getting naked with another woman.

No, no, no, no, no ...

And with every refusal came Harvey's Machiavellian rage.

I don't think he hated anything more than the word "no." The absurdity of his demands went from getting a furious call in the middle of the night asking me to fire my agent for a fight he was having with him about a different movie with a different client to physically dragging me out of the opening gala of the Venice Film Festival, which was in honor of "Frida," so I could hang out at his private party with him and some women I thought were models but I was told later were high-priced prostitutes.

The range of his persuasion tactics went from sweet-talking me to that one time when, in an attack of fury, he said the terrifying words, "I will kill you, don't think I can't."

When he was finally convinced that I was not going to earn the movie the way he had expected, he told me he had offered my role and my script with my years of research to another actress.

In his eyes, I was not an artist. I wasn't even a person. I was a thing: not a nobody, but a body.

At that point, I had to resort to using lawyers, not by pursuing a sexual harassment case, but by claiming "bad faith," as I had worked so hard on a movie that he was not intending to make or sell back to me. I tried to get it out of his company.

He claimed that my name as an actress was not big enough and that I was incompetent as a producer, but to clear himself legally, as I understood it, he gave me a list of impossible tasks with a tight deadline:

1. Get a rewrite of the script, with no additional payment.

2. Raise $10 million to finance the film.

3. Attach an A-list director.

4. Cast four of the smaller roles with prominent actors.

Much to everyone's amazement, not least my own, I delivered, thanks to a phalanx of angels who came to my rescue, including Edward Norton, who beautifully rewrote the script several times and appallingly never got credit, and my friend Margaret Perenchio, a first-time producer, who put up the money. The brilliant Julie Taymor agreed to direct, and from then on she became my rock. For the other roles, I recruited my friends Antonio Banderas, Edward Norton and my dear Ashley Judd. To this day, I don't know how I convinced Geoffrey Rush, whom I barely knew at the time.

Now Harvey Weinstein was not only rejected but also about to do a movie he did not want to do.

Ironically, once we started filming, the sexual harassment stopped but the rage escalated. We paid the price for standing up to him nearly every day of shooting. Once, in an interview he said Julie and I were the biggest ball busters he had ever encountered, which we took as a compliment.

Halfway through shooting, Harvey turned up on set and complained about Frida's "unibrow." He insisted that I eliminate the limp and berated my performance. Then he asked everyone in the room to step out except for me. He told me that the only thing I had going for me was my sex appeal and that there was none of that in this movie. So he told me he was going to shut down the film because no one would want to see me in that role.

It was soul crushing because, I confess, lost in the fog of a sort of Stockholm syndrome, I wanted him to see me as an artist: not only as a capable actress but also as somebody who could identify a compelling story and had the vision to tell it in an original way.

I was hoping he would acknowledge me as a producer, who on top of delivering his list of demands shepherded the script and obtained the permits to use the paintings. I had negotiated with the Mexican government, and with whomever I had to, to get locations that had never been given to anyone in the past - including Frida Kahlo's houses and the murals of Kahlo's husband, Diego Rivera, among others.

But all of this seemed to have no value. The only thing he noticed was that I was not sexy in the movie. He made me doubt if I was any good as an actress, but he never succeeded in making me think that the film was not worth making.

He offered me one option to continue. He would let me finish the film if I agreed to do a sex scene with another woman. And he demanded full-frontal nudity.

He had been constantly asking for more skin, for more sex. Once before, Julie Taymor got him to settle for a tango ending in a kiss instead of the lovemaking scene he wanted us to shoot between the character Tina Modotti, played by Ashley Judd, and Frida.

But this time, it was clear to me he would never let me finish this movie without him having his fantasy one way or another. There was no room for negotiation.

I had to say yes. By now so many years of my life had gone into this film. We were about five weeks into shooting, and I had convinced so many talented people to participate. How could I let their magnificent work go to waste?

I had asked for so many favors, I felt an immense pressure to deliver and a deep sense of gratitude for all those who did believe in me and followed me into this madness. So I agreed to do the senseless scene.

I arrived on the set the day we were to shoot the scene that I believed would save the movie. And for the first and last time in my career, I had a nervous breakdown: My body began to shake uncontrollably, my breath was short and I began to cry and cry, unable to stop, as if I were throwing up tears.

Since those around me had no knowledge of my history of Harvey, they were very surprised by my struggle that morning. It was not because I would be naked with another woman. It was because I would be naked with her for Harvey Weinstein. But I could not tell them then.

My mind understood that I had to do it, but my body wouldn't stop crying and convulsing. At that point, I started throwing up while a set frozen still waited to shoot. I had to take a tranquilizer, which eventually stopped the crying but made the vomiting worse. As you can imagine, this was not sexy, but it was the only way I could get through the scene.

By the time the filming of the movie was over, I was so emotionally distraught that I had to distance myself during the postproduction.

When Harvey saw the cut film, he said it was not good enough for a theatrical release and that he would send it straight to video.

This time Julie had to fight him without me and got him to agree to release the film in one movie theater in New York if we tested it to an audience and we scored at least an 80.

Less than 10 percent of films achieve that score on a first screening.

I didn't go to the test. I anxiously awaited to receive the news. The film scored 85.

And again, I heard Harvey raged. In the lobby of a theater after the screening, he screamed at Julie. He balled up one of the scorecards and threw it at her. It bounced off her nose. Her partner, the film's composer Elliot Goldenthal, stepped in, and Harvey physically threatened him.

Once he calmed down, I found the strength to call Harvey to ask him also to open the movie in a theater in Los Angeles, which made a total of two theaters. And without much ado, he gave me that. I have to say sometimes he was kind, fun and witty - and that was part of the problem: You just never knew which Harvey you were going to get.

Months later, in October 2002, this film, about my hero and inspiration - this Mexican artist who never truly got acknowledged in her time with her limp and her unibrow, this film that Harvey never wanted to do, gave him a box office success that no one could have predicted, and despite his lack of support, added six Academy Award nominations to his collection, including best actress.

Even though "Frida" eventually won him two Oscars, I still didn't see any joy. He never offered me a starring role in a movie again. The films that I was obliged to do under my original deal with Miramax were all minor supporting roles.

Years later, when I ran into him at an event, he pulled me aside and told me he had stopped smoking and he had had a heart attack. He said he'd fallen in love and married Georgina Chapman, and that he was a changed man. Finally, he said to me: "You did well with 'Frida'; we did a beautiful movie."

I believed him. Harvey would never know how much those words meant to me. He also would never know how much he hurt me. I never showed Harvey how terrified I was of him. When I saw him socially, I'd smile and try to remember the good things about him, telling myself that I went to war and I won.

But why do so many of us, as female artists, have to go to war to tell our stories when we have so much to offer? Why do we have to fight tooth and nail to maintain our dignity?

I think it is because we, as women, have been devalued artistically to an indecent state, to the point where the film industry stopped making an effort to find out what female audiences wanted to see and what stories we wanted to tell.

According to a recent study, between 2007 and 2016, only 4 percent of directors were female and 80 percent of those got the chance to make only one film. In 2016, another study found, only 27 percent of words spoken in the biggest movies were spoken by women. And people wonder why you didn't hear our voices sooner. I think the statistics are self-explanatory - our voices are not welcome.

Until there is equality in our industry, with men and women having the same value in every aspect of it, our community will continue to be a fertile ground for predators.

I am grateful for everyone who is listening to our experiences. I hope that adding my voice to the chorus of those who are finally speaking out will shed light on why it is so difficult, and why so many of us have waited so long. Men sexually harassed because they could. Women are talking today because, in this new era, we finally can.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Opinion | Harvey Weinstein Is My Monster Too (Published 2017)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Harvey Weinstein was a passionate cinephile, a risk taker, a patron of talent in film, a loving father and a monster. For years, he was my monster. This fall, I was approached by reporters, through different sources, including my dear friend Ashley Judd, to speak about an episode in my life that, although painful, I thought I had made peace with.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Daily Beast article by Erin Gloria Ryan

# data[].attributes.subject
The Daily Beast article by Erin Gloria Ryan

# data[].attributes.body
Who is/are the speakers?
The speaker is a journalist. Senior editor at The Daily Beast, contributor to various other media.

What’s their expertise and/or connection to their material?

She is a woman. She has written multiple articles on the# metoo movement.

What is the format of the information?

magazine article

How does format influence your perception of what they’re saying? Do you think this source has authority on your research topic? Why or why not?

the lack of sources cited takes away from the quality of the article. Its more personal experience than scholarly research.

How is power (as it relates to gender, race, or otherwise) evidenced or discussed in your source?
She talks about violence against women.
Select a quote or passage you might cite in your research paper. What is it? Why did you choose it?

" That’s because, even in the #MeToo era, we still punish victims for not being perfect and excuse the powerful who act like monsters. The misogyny at the root of gender inequality directs the way we respond to high-profile cases of misconduct like gravity. It’s everywhere, it’s invisible, and it’s inescapable." This section summarizes the crux of the matter.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It's been about a year since the first wave of #MeToo stories changed the way we talk about sexual misconduct. But amid all the "What about the men?" hand-wringing and nervous Hollywood board meetings and sassy feminist T-shirt sportings and red carpet back-pattings, it's hard to say we've made satisfactory progress. Especially if you're Christine Blasey Ford.

Last week, Christine Blasey Ford told the Washington Post that when she was 15, a drunken 17-year-old Brett Kavanaugh held her down and attempted to rape her at a party. Christine Blasey Ford also told a therapist and her husband in 2012, a friend in 2017, and her Congressman a few months earlier this year. She says she risked everything by coming forward out of a sense of civic duty. And Brett Kavanaugh will probably become a Supreme Court justice, anyway. Yes, #HimToo.

People who didn't want Ford's accusation to be true came for Ford's credibility like they've always come for the credibility of other accusers of other men. On one hand, it's reasonable to expect an accusation as serious as sexual misconduct to be credible and it's foolhardy to lend too much credence to accusations without any supporting evidence. But on the other, many of the traits that doubters say undermine an accuser's credibility make no sense. They've never made sense.

Kavanaugh supporters accused Ford of being part of a political Hail Mary that aimed to snipe off a Supreme Court nomination at the last minute, despite the fact that it was the Democrats, and not Ford, who kept the accusations secret for months. They tried to smear Ford's credibility by citing bad reviews on RateMyProfessors.com, despite the fact that getting bad reviews on a website that awards a hot pepper icon to teachers students find sexually attractive has nothing to do with telling the truth or lying-and they had the wrong Christine Ford. They pointed out that Kavanaugh's mother, a judge, had presided over part of Ford's parents' case, and thus Ford was motivated by a decades-long familial grudge, despite the fact that Kavanaugh's mother issued a favorable ruling to Ford's parents.

Kavanaugh's boosters have been playing all the hits in defending their guy against the woman who could ruin it all. There's the old "What about all the women he didn't attempt to rape?' defense. After Ford's allegations went public, Kavanaugh's camp offered for the public's consideration a letter signed by 65 women who claim that Brett Kavanaugh never sexually assaulted them, not even a little bit. Isn't that nice? If a man has met and had conversations with, say, 2,000 women in his life and only held down and attempted to rape one of them, that's a pretty solid percentage. Less than 1 percent of female acquaintances report attempted rapes! Not too shabby!

There's also been the "It was a long time ago" response. I say "response" because "It was a long time ago" isn't a defense as much as it is an implicit admission of guilt paired with an arbitrarily imposed statute of limitations as a chaser.

We've also heard from the "He was drinking" defense. Kavanaugh was drinking, and therefore what he did matters less. She was drinking, and therefore what she did matters more. I find it quite unfair that when a man has been drinking, he can't be held accountable for how he behaves, but when a woman has been drinking, she's on the hook for for not only how she behaves, but also for how every man around her behaves. Seems like a lot of responsibility for the second sex.

Detractors still accuse victims of seeking fame or attention. But accusing prominent men of sexual misconduct has never been a path to wealth or the sort of fame that generates wealth. Accusers often end up stained by sexual misconduct accusations more indelibly than the men they accuse, even if the accusers came forward reluctantly. Just look at Paula Jones and Bill Clinton. Or Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas. I struggle to think of a single beloved female public figure who got her start by accusing a man of sexual misconduct. I can think of several whose lives and careers were sidelined or forever defined by what was done to them, and I know there must be thousands of others whose names I'll never know. If Christine Ford is attempting to go from accuser to America's sweetheart, against all the odds, she'd be the first woman in history to do so. What a moonshot that would be.

Imperfect victimhood leads to a gleeful celebration of those imperfections as victories for misogyny and losses for feminism. It's disturbing. When Rose McGowan was indicted for cocaine possession earlier this year, some right-wing thought leaders crowed, as though McGowan having drugs meant that sexual abuse as a concept didn't exist, or didn't exist for her. When news reports revealed that Asia Argento had settled her own sexual misconduct suit, some on the right acted as though that meant that it wasn't possible that she had also been a victim of rape. Personal flaws in victims are often held up as reasons to discredit the very concept of victimhood or at least move the goalposts so far downfield that to be a real survivor is as unobtainable as sainthood.

Meanwhile, men rise to the tops of their fields even after sexual misconduct allegations. One of them is currently the president. They've won Oscars, Emmys, Grammys. Plenty of men who have used their power to hurt women own restaurants and manage retail stores and inflict their own brand of terror away from coastal media centers and their commensurate media megaphones. Public tskings are more common now than they once were, but some of the most prominent men to have their misdeeds exposed last year are already trying to mount comebacks.

Real progress is in sussing out institutionally-sanctioned sexual violence has been much slower than the splashy #MeToo headlines and photo ops would lead one to believe. Some powerful men have lost overall deals or board seats, but less than a year from the first round of #MeToo stories, origins of the misogyny that led to this problem in the first place go unchecked. Unless we kill it at the root, it will keep growing back. And it matters more than one seat on the Supreme Court.

Stories like Christine Blasey Ford's-stories of jerks at parties holding them down or groping them or worse-are more common than optimistic progressives would like to admit. Most of those stories stay private. Some of them advance to being told to confidants. Fewer still become stories that get swapped with other women over drinks, like sick trading cards, or become part of the "whisper networks" that women relied on to warn each other privately about creeps in their industries. And the fewest still ever become public, even now. That's because, even in the #MeToo era, we still punish victims for not being perfect and excuse the powerful who act like monsters. The misogyny at the root of gender inequality directs the way we respond to high-profile cases of misconduct like gravity. It's everywhere, it's invisible, and it's inescapable.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Christine Blasey Ford Shows We've Made Little Progress With #MeToo

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It's been about a year since the first wave of #MeToo stories changed the way we talk about sexual misconduct. But amid all the "What about the men?" hand-wringing and nervous Hollywood board meetings and sassy feminist T-shirt sportings and red carpet back-pattings, it's hard to say we've made satisfactory progress.

# data[].attributes.headline
Journal article by Mary Lawhon - Post-Weinstein Academia

# data[].attributes.subject
Journal article by Mary Lawhon - Post-Weinstein Academia

# data[].attributes.body
Who is/are the speakers?

MARY LAWHON

What’s their expertise and/or connection to their material?

PHD IN GEOGRAPHY

What is the format of the information?

ACADEMIC ARTICLE

How does format influence your perception of what they’re saying? Do you think this source has authority on your research topic? Why or why not?

CREDIBLE, SUPPORTED BY EVIDENCE FROM RESEARCH FINDINGS

How is power (as it relates to gender, race, or otherwise) evidenced or discussed in your source?
2016 ELECTIONS, POLITICAL EVENTS, METOO MOVEMENT
Select a quote or passage you might cite in your research paper. What is it? Why did you choose it?

Power can be removed from systematic offenders in ways that change power-laden relationships.

Harassment and discrimination have for too long disabled the full participation of the global social majority in academic life.

# data[].attributes.headline
Rebecca Traister on #MeToo, female rage, and Anita Hill (podcast)

# data[].attributes.subject
Rebecca Traister on #MeToo, female rage, and Anita Hill (podcast)

# data[].attributes.body
Who is/are the speakers?

What’s their expertise and/or connection to their material?

What is the format of the information?

How does format influence your perception of what they’re saying? Do you think this source has authority on your research topic? Why or why not?

How is power (as it relates to gender, race, or otherwise) evidenced or discussed in your source?

Select a quote or passage you might cite in your research paper. What is it? Why did you choose it?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Listen to The Ezra Klein Show episodes free, on demand. Ezra Klein brings you far-reaching conversations about hard problems, big ideas, illuminating theories, and cutting-edge research. Want to know how Mark Zuckerberg intends to govern Facebook? What Barack Obama regrets in Obamacare? The dangers Yuval Harari sees in our future?