Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people (person?) on this thread saying "you can just walk away" doesn't understand that when you are employed by someone, you can't always. Not only might there not be another job suitable to your skillset (and being a dancer is a niche skillset), but these industries tend to be insular. Quitting a tour could piss off not only the artist, but also the choreographer, tour manager, booking agent, etc. Sure, maybe it gets so bad that you are willing to move in with your parents and work at McDonald's. But if simply asking for a workplace free of sexual harassment and coercion could result in you losing your job AND being blackballed in your industry, then no you CAN'T just "walk away."

There is no reason that entering the entertainment industry should mean that you subject yourself to abuse and harassment, I don't understand why so many people think that should be the case. Why? Why shouldn't an entertainer be entitled to a safe workplace?

At the highest levels, entertainers need to be a special brand of crazy to keep entertaining and keep things interesting. You lose that and they become boring/uninteresting. So the assumption is that you will deal with a little bit of crazy in the industry. It's not a factory floor concerned with OHSA protections. It's entertainment.

It's like going to a law firm and complaining about all of the combative, scheming personalities. Well...yes.

This is why I can both 1) sympathize with the dancers who had to work in that environment, bc I wouldn't want to, and also 2) wonder with some exasperation what the dancers expected when they joined Lizzo Inc, known for raunchy, overtly sexual (but positive!) lyrics. I think artistic endeavors like rock bands, etc. can't be easily compared to a corporate job. That's why when people say, how would you feel if this happened at your job, it hits as being a bit off. My job isn't producing/stylizing raunchy rap music, and if it were, I wouldn't be stunned that it also entailed raunchy, vulgar activities.

Being overtly sexual and body-positive are not the same things as pressuring an employee to do something sexual against their will, and fat-shaming an employee. These women are not suing Lizzo for being raunchy.

In professional sports, rookie athletes are hazed into doing embarrassing things and constantly critiqued about their bodies.

Some workplaces are just a little bit different.

Okay? I’m not pro-hazing, either.

I get that you really want it to be okay for Lizzo to pressure her employees into groping strippers’ breasts and eating bananas out of their vaginas, but it’s just not.

You're also not a pro athlete. Or an entertainer.

Stop comparing your workplace expectations to theirs.

DP but I actually AM an entertainer, and you are full of it. No entertainer wants to be abused or accepts abuse as part of the gig. That’s psychotic.

Abuse happens in the entertainment industry because there are more people who want these jobs than there are jobs to go around. This enables some people to be abusive because entertainment workers do fear that they could be too easily replaced, even when they have high level, refined skills. There are massive power imbalances.

This is one of many reasons why entertainment and sports continue to have very strong unions, even as other industries have seen declining union membership. We join unions specifically because the risk of exploitation is high. We don’t just accept that abuse is part of the gig.

There’s actually a lot less abuse in the industry now than there used to be, thanks to unions and people who have spoken out, sued, gotten media involved. And yet despite this huge decline in abuse/exploitation, the entertainment industry continues to function. It’s like abuse is NOT in fact necessary fir the industry but a problem we need to solve.

I am confident a lot of pro athletes feel similarly, actually. I bet hazing now is way better than it used to be for the same reasons.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people (person?) on this thread saying "you can just walk away" doesn't understand that when you are employed by someone, you can't always. Not only might there not be another job suitable to your skillset (and being a dancer is a niche skillset), but these industries tend to be insular. Quitting a tour could piss off not only the artist, but also the choreographer, tour manager, booking agent, etc. Sure, maybe it gets so bad that you are willing to move in with your parents and work at McDonald's. But if simply asking for a workplace free of sexual harassment and coercion could result in you losing your job AND being blackballed in your industry, then no you CAN'T just "walk away."

There is no reason that entering the entertainment industry should mean that you subject yourself to abuse and harassment, I don't understand why so many people think that should be the case. Why? Why shouldn't an entertainer be entitled to a safe workplace?

At the highest levels, entertainers need to be a special brand of crazy to keep entertaining and keep things interesting. You lose that and they become boring/uninteresting. So the assumption is that you will deal with a little bit of crazy in the industry. It's not a factory floor concerned with OHSA protections. It's entertainment.

It's like going to a law firm and complaining about all of the combative, scheming personalities. Well...yes.

This is why I can both 1) sympathize with the dancers who had to work in that environment, bc I wouldn't want to, and also 2) wonder with some exasperation what the dancers expected when they joined Lizzo Inc, known for raunchy, overtly sexual (but positive!) lyrics. I think artistic endeavors like rock bands, etc. can't be easily compared to a corporate job. That's why when people say, how would you feel if this happened at your job, it hits as being a bit off. My job isn't producing/stylizing raunchy rap music, and if it were, I wouldn't be stunned that it also entailed raunchy, vulgar activities.

Being overtly sexual and body-positive are not the same things as pressuring an employee to do something sexual against their will, and fat-shaming an employee. These women are not suing Lizzo for being raunchy.

In professional sports, rookie athletes are hazed into doing embarrassing things and constantly critiqued about their bodies.

Some workplaces are just a little bit different.

Okay? I’m not pro-hazing, either.

I get that you really want it to be okay for Lizzo to pressure her employees into groping strippers’ breasts and eating bananas out of their vaginas, but it’s just not.

You're also not a pro athlete. Or an entertainer.

Stop comparing your workplace expectations to theirs.

DP. I read the article. No one should be forced to engage in any sexual behavior that they are not comfortable with, in the workplace, or out of the workplace.

If Lizzo wants them to do these sexual acts, she needs to forewarn them so there is informed consent.

Anyone trying to support this woman must her PR staff, troll, or an abuser yourself.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people (person?) on this thread saying "you can just walk away" doesn't understand that when you are employed by someone, you can't always. Not only might there not be another job suitable to your skillset (and being a dancer is a niche skillset), but these industries tend to be insular. Quitting a tour could piss off not only the artist, but also the choreographer, tour manager, booking agent, etc. Sure, maybe it gets so bad that you are willing to move in with your parents and work at McDonald's. But if simply asking for a workplace free of sexual harassment and coercion could result in you losing your job AND being blackballed in your industry, then no you CAN'T just "walk away."

There is no reason that entering the entertainment industry should mean that you subject yourself to abuse and harassment, I don't understand why so many people think that should be the case. Why? Why shouldn't an entertainer be entitled to a safe workplace?

At the highest levels, entertainers need to be a special brand of crazy to keep entertaining and keep things interesting. You lose that and they become boring/uninteresting. So the assumption is that you will deal with a little bit of crazy in the industry. It's not a factory floor concerned with OHSA protections. It's entertainment.

It's like going to a law firm and complaining about all of the combative, scheming personalities. Well...yes.

This is why I can both 1) sympathize with the dancers who had to work in that environment, bc I wouldn't want to, and also 2) wonder with some exasperation what the dancers expected when they joined Lizzo Inc, known for raunchy, overtly sexual (but positive!) lyrics. I think artistic endeavors like rock bands, etc. can't be easily compared to a corporate job. That's why when people say, how would you feel if this happened at your job, it hits as being a bit off. My job isn't producing/stylizing raunchy rap music, and if it were, I wouldn't be stunned that it also entailed raunchy, vulgar activities.

Being overtly sexual and body-positive are not the same things as pressuring an employee to do something sexual against their will, and fat-shaming an employee. These women are not suing Lizzo for being raunchy.

In professional sports, rookie athletes are hazed into doing embarrassing things and constantly critiqued about their bodies.

Some workplaces are just a little bit different.

Okay? I’m not pro-hazing, either.

I get that you really want it to be okay for Lizzo to pressure her employees into groping strippers’ breasts and eating bananas out of their vaginas, but it’s just not.

You're also not a pro athlete. Or an entertainer.

Stop comparing your workplace expectations to theirs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people (person?) on this thread saying "you can just walk away" doesn't understand that when you are employed by someone, you can't always. Not only might there not be another job suitable to your skillset (and being a dancer is a niche skillset), but these industries tend to be insular. Quitting a tour could piss off not only the artist, but also the choreographer, tour manager, booking agent, etc. Sure, maybe it gets so bad that you are willing to move in with your parents and work at McDonald's. But if simply asking for a workplace free of sexual harassment and coercion could result in you losing your job AND being blackballed in your industry, then no you CAN'T just "walk away."

There is no reason that entering the entertainment industry should mean that you subject yourself to abuse and harassment, I don't understand why so many people think that should be the case. Why? Why shouldn't an entertainer be entitled to a safe workplace?

At the highest levels, entertainers need to be a special brand of crazy to keep entertaining and keep things interesting. You lose that and they become boring/uninteresting. So the assumption is that you will deal with a little bit of crazy in the industry. It's not a factory floor concerned with OHSA protections. It's entertainment.

It's like going to a law firm and complaining about all of the combative, scheming personalities. Well...yes.

This is why I can both 1) sympathize with the dancers who had to work in that environment, bc I wouldn't want to, and also 2) wonder with some exasperation what the dancers expected when they joined Lizzo Inc, known for raunchy, overtly sexual (but positive!) lyrics. I think artistic endeavors like rock bands, etc. can't be easily compared to a corporate job. That's why when people say, how would you feel if this happened at your job, it hits as being a bit off. My job isn't producing/stylizing raunchy rap music, and if it were, I wouldn't be stunned that it also entailed raunchy, vulgar activities.

Being overtly sexual and body-positive are not the same things as pressuring an employee to do something sexual against their will, and fat-shaming an employee. These women are not suing Lizzo for being raunchy.

In professional sports, rookie athletes are hazed into doing embarrassing things and constantly critiqued about their bodies.

Some workplaces are just a little bit different.

Okay? I’m not pro-hazing, either.

I get that you really want it to be okay for Lizzo to pressure her employees into groping strippers’ breasts and eating bananas out of their vaginas, but it’s just not.

Anonymous wrote:You don’t have to be crazy and abusive to make good, interesting, innovative art. This is something people say to justify being abusive and exploiting others. It’s no different from any other industry claiming they couldn’t possibly operate without abusive/exploitative employment practices. Of course they can. But some people like to see what they can get away with. Having talent is a form of power, and you can get away with a lot. But it’s not necessary to the creative process, lol.

This behavior reflects a lot of immaturity and selfishness. That has nothing to do with artistic ability.

Also, while I like Lizzo’s music, she’s not SO groundbreaking that it justifies treating people like crap. If you’re going to argue that artists can be abusive because that’s what it takes to make great art, a handful of catchy pop/rap songs are not going to cut it. No one is going to care about Lizzo’s music in 50 years. She not great enough to make this argument, even if it were a valid one, which it is not.

It's not just about the quality of the art though or the ability; it's about the personality types the survive/thrive in the entertainment industry. Cultivating a following is also as much about your persona/personality as it is about the quality of your art.

Yes, there can be exceptions, but on the whole, top entertainers are a bit more...special than other workplaces.

There are plenty of uber talented artists and musicians that nobody has ever heard about and these dancers are free to work with/for them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people (person?) on this thread saying "you can just walk away" doesn't understand that when you are employed by someone, you can't always. Not only might there not be another job suitable to your skillset (and being a dancer is a niche skillset), but these industries tend to be insular. Quitting a tour could piss off not only the artist, but also the choreographer, tour manager, booking agent, etc. Sure, maybe it gets so bad that you are willing to move in with your parents and work at McDonald's. But if simply asking for a workplace free of sexual harassment and coercion could result in you losing your job AND being blackballed in your industry, then no you CAN'T just "walk away."

There is no reason that entering the entertainment industry should mean that you subject yourself to abuse and harassment, I don't understand why so many people think that should be the case. Why? Why shouldn't an entertainer be entitled to a safe workplace?

At the highest levels, entertainers need to be a special brand of crazy to keep entertaining and keep things interesting. You lose that and they become boring/uninteresting. So the assumption is that you will deal with a little bit of crazy in the industry. It's not a factory floor concerned with OHSA protections. It's entertainment.

It's like going to a law firm and complaining about all of the combative, scheming personalities. Well...yes.

This is why I can both 1) sympathize with the dancers who had to work in that environment, bc I wouldn't want to, and also 2) wonder with some exasperation what the dancers expected when they joined Lizzo Inc, known for raunchy, overtly sexual (but positive!) lyrics. I think artistic endeavors like rock bands, etc. can't be easily compared to a corporate job. That's why when people say, how would you feel if this happened at your job, it hits as being a bit off. My job isn't producing/stylizing raunchy rap music, and if it were, I wouldn't be stunned that it also entailed raunchy, vulgar activities.

Being overtly sexual and body-positive are not the same things as pressuring an employee to do something sexual against their will, and fat-shaming an employee. These women are not suing Lizzo for being raunchy.

In professional sports, rookie athletes are hazed into doing embarrassing things and constantly critiqued about their bodies.

Some workplaces are just a little bit different.

You don’t have to be crazy and abusive to make good, interesting, innovative art. This is something people say to justify being abusive and exploiting others. It’s no different from any other industry claiming they couldn’t possibly operate without abusive/exploitative employment practices. Of course they can. But some people like to see what they can get away with. Having talent is a form of power, and you can get away with a lot. But it’s not necessary to the creative process, lol.

This behavior reflects a lot of immaturity and selfishness. That has nothing to do with artistic ability.

Also, while I like Lizzo’s music, she’s not SO groundbreaking that it justifies treating people like crap. If you’re going to argue that artists can be abusive because that’s what it takes to make great art, a handful of catchy pop/rap songs are not going to cut it. No one is going to care about Lizzo’s music in 50 years. She not great enough to make this argument, even if it were a valid one, which it is not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people (person?) on this thread saying "you can just walk away" doesn't understand that when you are employed by someone, you can't always. Not only might there not be another job suitable to your skillset (and being a dancer is a niche skillset), but these industries tend to be insular. Quitting a tour could piss off not only the artist, but also the choreographer, tour manager, booking agent, etc. Sure, maybe it gets so bad that you are willing to move in with your parents and work at McDonald's. But if simply asking for a workplace free of sexual harassment and coercion could result in you losing your job AND being blackballed in your industry, then no you CAN'T just "walk away."

There is no reason that entering the entertainment industry should mean that you subject yourself to abuse and harassment, I don't understand why so many people think that should be the case. Why? Why shouldn't an entertainer be entitled to a safe workplace?

At the highest levels, entertainers need to be a special brand of crazy to keep entertaining and keep things interesting. You lose that and they become boring/uninteresting. So the assumption is that you will deal with a little bit of crazy in the industry. It's not a factory floor concerned with OHSA protections. It's entertainment.

It's like going to a law firm and complaining about all of the combative, scheming personalities. Well...yes.

This is why I can both 1) sympathize with the dancers who had to work in that environment, bc I wouldn't want to, and also 2) wonder with some exasperation what the dancers expected when they joined Lizzo Inc, known for raunchy, overtly sexual (but positive!) lyrics. I think artistic endeavors like rock bands, etc. can't be easily compared to a corporate job. That's why when people say, how would you feel if this happened at your job, it hits as being a bit off. My job isn't producing/stylizing raunchy rap music, and if it were, I wouldn't be stunned that it also entailed raunchy, vulgar activities.

Being overtly sexual and body-positive are not the same things as pressuring an employee to do something sexual against their will, and fat-shaming an employee. These women are not suing Lizzo for being raunchy.

Anonymous wrote:I easily believe she's a terror, but fat shaming? huh?

I once dated a guy who's mother was morbidly obese. She gossiped constantly about fat people and constantly saying inappropriate things to me about my slender (at the time) figure to the point if she were male it would be definitely be considered sexual harassment.

A person who was involved initially with her documentary came forward too. I believe them all. I have worked in a dysfunctional workplace before. The only good thing about abusers is there is rarely just one person. They make you feel isolated, but they can't help but be repeat offenders. When I left the worst workplace of my life I filed a complaint about the man who was inappropriate with me repeatedly so there would be something on file when the next person complained. (He had a blatant affair someone who he supervised the year before I came so they already knew he was trouble). It took many years, but they did eventually get rid of him.

I suspect she is indeed "qoo% that B" as she claims in her lyrics!

Lol @ fat shaming… was she looking in the mirror when she did that?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people (person?) on this thread saying "you can just walk away" doesn't understand that when you are employed by someone, you can't always. Not only might there not be another job suitable to your skillset (and being a dancer is a niche skillset), but these industries tend to be insular. Quitting a tour could piss off not only the artist, but also the choreographer, tour manager, booking agent, etc. Sure, maybe it gets so bad that you are willing to move in with your parents and work at McDonald's. But if simply asking for a workplace free of sexual harassment and coercion could result in you losing your job AND being blackballed in your industry, then no you CAN'T just "walk away."

There is no reason that entering the entertainment industry should mean that you subject yourself to abuse and harassment, I don't understand why so many people think that should be the case. Why? Why shouldn't an entertainer be entitled to a safe workplace?

At the highest levels, entertainers need to be a special brand of crazy to keep entertaining and keep things interesting. You lose that and they become boring/uninteresting. So the assumption is that you will deal with a little bit of crazy in the industry. It's not a factory floor concerned with OHSA protections. It's entertainment.

It's like going to a law firm and complaining about all of the combative, scheming personalities. Well...yes.

This is why I can both 1) sympathize with the dancers who had to work in that environment, bc I wouldn't want to, and also 2) wonder with some exasperation what the dancers expected when they joined Lizzo Inc, known for raunchy, overtly sexual (but positive!) lyrics. I think artistic endeavors like rock bands, etc. can't be easily compared to a corporate job. That's why when people say, how would you feel if this happened at your job, it hits as being a bit off. My job isn't producing/stylizing raunchy rap music, and if it were, I wouldn't be stunned that it also entailed raunchy, vulgar activities.

This is a good point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who tf is this large Lizzo person and why is she a thing?

She's a national treasure. She was invited to the Library of Congress and is the only person in 200 years that was allowed to use James Madison's crystal flute.

Not anymore. She's done.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people (person?) on this thread saying "you can just walk away" doesn't understand that when you are employed by someone, you can't always. Not only might there not be another job suitable to your skillset (and being a dancer is a niche skillset), but these industries tend to be insular. Quitting a tour could piss off not only the artist, but also the choreographer, tour manager, booking agent, etc. Sure, maybe it gets so bad that you are willing to move in with your parents and work at McDonald's. But if simply asking for a workplace free of sexual harassment and coercion could result in you losing your job AND being blackballed in your industry, then no you CAN'T just "walk away."

There is no reason that entering the entertainment industry should mean that you subject yourself to abuse and harassment, I don't understand why so many people think that should be the case. Why? Why shouldn't an entertainer be entitled to a safe workplace?

At the highest levels, entertainers need to be a special brand of crazy to keep entertaining and keep things interesting. You lose that and they become boring/uninteresting. So the assumption is that you will deal with a little bit of crazy in the industry. It's not a factory floor concerned with OHSA protections. It's entertainment.

It's like going to a law firm and complaining about all of the combative, scheming personalities. Well...yes.

This is why I can both 1) sympathize with the dancers who had to work in that environment, bc I wouldn't want to, and also 2) wonder with some exasperation what the dancers expected when they joined Lizzo Inc, known for raunchy, overtly sexual (but positive!) lyrics. I think artistic endeavors like rock bands, etc. can't be easily compared to a corporate job. That's why when people say, how would you feel if this happened at your job, it hits as being a bit off. My job isn't producing/stylizing raunchy rap music, and if it were, I wouldn't be stunned that it also entailed raunchy, vulgar activities.

Anonymous wrote:The people (person?) on this thread saying "you can just walk away" doesn't understand that when you are employed by someone, you can't always. Not only might there not be another job suitable to your skillset (and being a dancer is a niche skillset), but these industries tend to be insular. Quitting a tour could piss off not only the artist, but also the choreographer, tour manager, booking agent, etc. Sure, maybe it gets so bad that you are willing to move in with your parents and work at McDonald's. But if simply asking for a workplace free of sexual harassment and coercion could result in you losing your job AND being blackballed in your industry, then no you CAN'T just "walk away."

There is no reason that entering the entertainment industry should mean that you subject yourself to abuse and harassment, I don't understand why so many people think that should be the case. Why? Why shouldn't an entertainer be entitled to a safe workplace?

At the highest levels, entertainers need to be a special brand of crazy to keep entertaining and keep things interesting. You lose that and they become boring/uninteresting. So the assumption is that you will deal with a little bit of crazy in the industry. It's not a factory floor concerned with OHSA protections. It's entertainment.

It's like going to a law firm and complaining about all of the combative, scheming personalities. Well...yes.

Anonymous wrote:The people (person?) on this thread saying "you can just walk away" doesn't understand that when you are employed by someone, you can't always. Not only might there not be another job suitable to your skillset (and being a dancer is a niche skillset), but these industries tend to be insular. Quitting a tour could piss off not only the artist, but also the choreographer, tour manager, booking agent, etc. Sure, maybe it gets so bad that you are willing to move in with your parents and work at McDonald's. But if simply asking for a workplace free of sexual harassment and coercion could result in you losing your job AND being blackballed in your industry, then no you CAN'T just "walk away."

There is no reason that entering the entertainment industry should mean that you subject yourself to abuse and harassment, I don't understand why so many people think that should be the case. Why? Why shouldn't an entertainer be entitled to a safe workplace?

+1 to this.