John Lasseter's Accusations and Statement

[Brian G.]

Replies need to be read in context of what it replied to, not as a statement in a vacuum. If someone didn't read the quote it referred to, that's on them.

Dude, it was a bad look. It came off as "I don't care what the outcome of his allegations are, I just wanna know about theme park stuff."

 

[Mad Dog]

It was poor wording. If you refuse to see how that can be, that's your interpretation. Enough. Let's move on.

Moving on is fine with me. I wasn't the one to bring it up. ...........................Moving forward....

 

[Scott W.]

Part of me hopes that this was all him being a drunk idiot and being oblivious to his actions with the victims being too scared to say anything or act on it. Not that this makes his actions any less bad but it gives Lasseter a chance to at least change his ways and apologise to the people he has hurt. If the victims don't want to accept the apology, you really can't blame them, it's a horrible and life changing thing to happen.

There's a very fine line between a fun drunk and a creep and the damage could well and truly be done. I hope this doesn't tarnish the reputation of Pixar.

 

[Paulio]

I hope this doesn't tarnish the reputation of Pixar.

Pixar as a company is still filled with good-hearted people who do their work their own way. We could still like the company for what they did and do in regards to the movies and charity and not one horrible person, let alone its founder.

 

[Brian G.]

Part of me hopes that this was all him being a drunk idiot and being oblivious to his actions with the victims being too scared to say anything or act on it. Not that this makes his actions any less bad but it gives Lasseter a chance to at least change his ways and apologise to the people he has hurt. If the victims don't want to accept the apology, you really can't blame them, it's a horrible and life changing thing to happen.

There's a very fine line between a fun drunk and a creep and the damage could well and truly be done. I hope this doesn't tarnish the reputation of Pixar.

Yeah, there's definitely a grey area when it comes to these kind of allegations. It could be he was completely unaware of how he came across with women; but he also could have a serious issue, too. If his behavior leads towards a more glaring issue - I hope Pixar execs didn't try to sweep it under the rug. That would do a lot more damage to Pixar then this (seemingly) one-off circumstance.

 

[epcyclopedia]

I'm chiming in to say how disappointed I am at some of you on how you handled the Pixar Pier thread. The Staff is not perfect, but we do our best to make sure discussions are open and respectful. The Pier thread is not, and was not, the place for this discussion. It should have been it's own thread to begin with. I stand with how Joe and Ryan handled this situation. These attitudes and off-topic tangents that have been going on need to stop.

And if things do change because his pet project is scrapped or reworked because nothing has been started physically, you'll issue a mea culpa?

The only facts you have that one has nothing to do with the other is "because I said so."

 

[Brian G.]

And if things do change because his pet project is scrapped or reworked because nothing has been started physically, you'll issue a mea culpa?

The only facts you have that one has nothing to do with the other is "because I said so."

It wasn't the place for it, period.

Do they have a relation? Yes.

Is it the important discussion to have right now? No.

Once something is announced about Pixar Pier being changed, or whatever - then you can take that discussion there. As of right now, the only thing that's known is Lasseter has taken a leave of absence from Pixar after alleged misconduct.

This will be the last time I will address the Pier/Lasseter thread. Time to move on for everyone. End of discussion.

 

[epcyclopedia]

It wasn't the place for it, period.

Do they have a relation? Yes.

Is it the important discussion to have right now? No.

Once something is announced about Pixar Pier being changed, or whatever - then you can take that discussion there. As of right now, the only thing that's known is Lasseter has taken a leave of absence from Pixar after alleged misconduct.

This will be the last time I will address the Pier/Lasseter thread. Time to move on for everyone. End of discussion.

I'll remind you that you personally told me it wasn't appropriate to discuss his drinking problem at all in the past, it had nothing to do with the parks, and was a topic verboten on these forums.

Your emotional knee jerk reaction is sweeping things under the rug.

Any Lasseter project is grinding to a halt as he's removed for 6 months at the very least.

 

[Brian G.]

I'll remind you that you personally told me it wasn't appropriate to discuss his drinking problem at all in the past, it had nothing to do with the parks, and was a topic verboten on these forums.

Your emotional knee jerk reaction is sweeping things under the rug.

Any Lasseter project is grinding to a halt as he's removed for 6 months at the very least.

Last warning.

 

[epcyclopedia]

Also, it's not "alleged" misconduct if he admits to it and apologizes for it.

 

[epcyclopedia]

Last warning.

Enabler. You enable sexual harassment,. You might as well be a rapist.

(The statement is true with the way you're behaving and you deserve it right now. I'm fine with being banned. Have a nice life. )

 

[Brian G.]

Enabler. You enable sexual harassment,. You might as well be a rapist.

(The statement is true with the way you're behaving and you deserve it right now. I'm fine with being banned. Have a nice life. )

Yes, I am enabler. I enable sexual harassment because instead of having the discussion be in a thread about a theme park addition, we wanted to have it on its own dedicated thread.

BTW, for full transparency

#MeToo.

 

[JoeCamel]

Part of me hopes that this was all him being a drunk idiot and being oblivious to his actions with the victims being too scared to say anything or act on it. Not that this makes his actions any less bad but it gives Lasseter a chance to at least change his ways and apologise to the people he has hurt. If the victims don't want to accept the apology, you really can't blame them, it's a horrible and life changing thing to happen.

There's a very fine line between a fun drunk and a creep and the damage could well and truly be done. I hope this doesn't tarnish the reputation of Pixar.

This is not an excuse of what was done by a powerful man but more of an understanding of why he acted the way he did.

When you are drunk all the time it might help your creativity (think great writers) as you are always making up stories in your sloshed little head that sound great to you but often are strange or weird to others. Alcohol not only warps your thinking but your understanding of social norms allowing you to do things a sober person would consider wildly inappropriate. The release of inhibitions becomes normal to you and your actions become normal to you while being totally offputting to everyone around you.

There is no excuse but the combination of being a "creative" while in a position of power coupled with the drunkeness may have led to JL thinking it was OK to be a "touchy -feeley" person while being creepy in reality. I have some personal experience in this area, it is amazing what stories you tell yourself to make your behavior OK in your mind.

 

[Scott W.]

Wow, this thread went rapidly downhill.

Yeah, there's definitely a grey area when it comes to these kind of allegations. It could be he was completely unaware of how he came across with women; but he also could have a serious issue, too. If his behavior leads towards a more glaring issue - I hope Pixar execs didn't try to sweep it under the rug. That would do a lot more damage to Pixar then this (seemingly) one-off circumstance.

It's a delicate situation, no doubt about it. It's amazing how one person could ruin everything for everybody who has worked non stop for over 2 decades.

This is not an excuse of what was done by a powerful man but more of an understanding of why he acted the way he did.

When you are drunk all the time it might help your creativity (think great writers) as you are always making up stories in your sloshed little head that sound great to you but often are strange or weird to others. Alcohol not only warps your thinking but your understanding of social norms allowing you to do things a sober person would consider wildly inappropriate. The release of inhibitions becomes normal to you and your actions become normal to you while being totally offputting to everyone around you.

There is no excuse but the combination of being a "creative" while in a position of power coupled with the drunkeness may have led to JL thinking it was OK to be a "touchy -feeley" person while being creepy in reality. I have some personal experience in this area, it is amazing what stories you tell yourself to make your behavior OK in your mind.

It sounds like he's about to have the hangover from hell and hopefully this leads to him getting the help that he needs. How do you help a potential alcoholic who owns a winery without destroying the hard work of other people?

 

[Brian G.]

Wow, this thread went rapidly downhill.

It did, sadly.

One has to realize with the Staff, we have to monitor and gauge conversations to keep the pace for everyone. Basically, we have to walk as slow as our slowest person (if that makes sense). I'll be making another post in light of all this later, as this is not the thread to appropriately talk about this.

 

[Andysol]

I mean, no offense to the victims at all, but this is nowhere near the scale of the Harvey Weinstein case. Let's try to not undermine or overstate the circumstances.



BTW I find this highly insensitive to the victims.

Are we over-using the word “victim”? I mean- does being hugged for an uncomfortably long time really warrant the term victim?

Should it happen? No. Is he a creeper? Sounds like it. Are you a victim? Nah... you just got hugged by a creeper. Creepers are everywhere, and it’s part of being a woman unfortunately.

I just find it ironic that an industry that essentially promotes and perpetuates massive sexuality in all of its movies and culture overall is enraged that people act upon the sexuality. I mean- Who coined the term “sex sells”?

I go back to the two women who went up to Louis CKs room- or even Weinstein? Some of the cases, of course- blatant harassment and abuse of power. But in some of these situations, do they really warrant the term “victim”? Going into a hotel room of a grown man alone... what do you think is going to happen? You can have a conversation and drinks in a lobby or bar.

Let’s also not discount the thousands of women who use their sexuality and attractiveness to advance their career- as do men. If I’m an attractive woman, I’d use it to my advantage- and playing someone and using that isn’t a bad thing IMO.

 

[Brian G.]

Are we over-using the word “victim”? I mean- does being hugged for an uncomfortably long time really warrant the term victim?

Should it happen? No. Is he a creeper? Sounds like it. Are you a victim? Nah... you just got hugged by a creeper. Creepers are everywhere, and it’s part of being a woman unfortunately.

I just find it ironic that an industry that essentially promotes and perpetuates massive sexuality in all of its movies and culture overall is enraged that people act upon the sexuality. I mean- Who coined the term “sex sells”?

I go back to the two women who went up to Louis CKs room- or even Weinstein? Some of the cases, of course- blatant harassment and abuse of power. But in some of these situations, do they really warrant the term “victim”? Going into a hotel room of a grown man alone... what do you think is going to happen? You can have a conversation and drinks in a lobby or bar.

Let’s also not discount the thousands of women who use their sexuality and attractiveness to advance their career- as do men. If I’m an attractive woman, I’d use it to my advantage- and playing someone and using that isn’t a bad thing IMO.

Tread carefully, man. I get what your saying, but some of the verbiage...Yikes......

 

[Andysol]

Tread carefully, man. I get what your saying, but some of the verbiage...Yikes......

I get it. And I’m ok with it Brian. I might be totally off-base.

As the father of two girls- one adopted and black and the other biological (and wife is Hispanic)- my wife and I discuss issues like this constantly. Race and gender because we want to do the right thing.

My wife is also knock-out gorgeous so that’s going to skew her view as well some. Because of which, she’s certainly no stranger to harassment, although always shrugs it off and would never consider herself a “victim”.

I say all that to say that I might be wrong in my view. That’s why I posted on here. It’s as much about hearing opinions of my viewpoint and growing from that as giving my opinion.

 

[Parkscope Joe]

Are we over-using the word “victim”? I mean- does being hugged for an uncomfortably long time really warrant the term victim?

Should it happen? No. Is he a creeper? Sounds like it. Are you a victim? Nah... you just got hugged by a creeper. Creepers are everywhere, and it’s part of being a woman unfortunately.

I just find it ironic that an industry that essentially promotes and perpetuates massive sexuality in all of its movies and culture overall is enraged that people act upon the sexuality. I mean- Who coined the term “sex sells”?

I go back to the two women who went up to Louis CKs room- or even Weinstein? Some of the cases, of course- blatant harassment and abuse of power. But in some of these situations, do they really warrant the term “victim”? Going into a hotel room of a grown man alone... what do you think is going to happen? You can have a conversation and drinks in a lobby or bar.

Let’s also not discount the thousands of women who use their sexuality and attractiveness to advance their career- as do men. If I’m an attractive woman, I’d use it to my advantage- and playing someone and using that isn’t a bad thing IMO.

There’s a lot to unpack here. I disagree on nearly all your points because of one word: consent.

Consent is a verbal yes. Consent isn’t dressing “sexy” or a skirt, consent isn’t allowing a creepy hug because you don’t want to cause issues in a workplace you’re already an outsider from, consent isn’t using your body to sell a product. And if no consent is given then they are victims and us on the outside do not have right to say otherwise.

No consent was given for long hugs and a kiss on the lips, no consent was given for putting your hand on a knee of someone in a skirt. It may not be the degree that Weinstein, Cosby, Louis CK, or others went to but it is still harassement and there are victims.

 

[Scott W.]

There’s a lot to unpack here. I disagree on nearly all your points because of one word: consent.

Consent is a verbal yes. Consent isn’t dressing “sexy” or a skirt, consent isn’t allowing a creepy hug because you don’t want to cause issues in a workplace you’re already an outsider from, consent isn’t using your body to sell a product. And if no consent is given then they are victims and us on the outside do not have right to say otherwise.

No consent was given for long hugs and a kiss on the lips, no consent was given for putting your hand on a knee of someone in a skirt. It may not be the degree that Weinstein, Cosby, Louis CK, or others went to but it is still harassement and there are victims.

This is difficult discussion to have because everybody has a different definition of where the line is. What some people think is ok is different for somebody else.

The problem with long hugs is that you can't exactly give consent, you can say stop but I think most people wouldn't. They don't potentially want to create a scene, they could have doubts that they are right, they don't want to embarrass their boss, etc.

I think this thread should be locked.