/hikki/ - NEET / Advice

Do you work in Hollywood? Anyway, you definitely should come out to the press. That information can help right many wrongs. The public also deserves to know that stuff, especially considering how much is constantly hid from them. As for having every bodies eyes on you, that would only be on tv. I doubt that anybody will stalk you or crowd around your house. Either way that attention passes very quickly. You wont become a celebrity just from one interview.

>>4049
Yeah, I work in Hollywood.

I've already decided that I *have* to go to the press. I'm also aware that I won't be swarmed by people in the streets, but the fear is definitely there. Doing my best to overcome it though.

>>4050
Good luck. If everybody in the industry had as much integrity as you, it would be much better for everybody.

Have you considered using a proxy of sorts? I mean, like, contacting some reporter anonymously, handling them the info, and letting it be?
I don't know how feasible that sounds, but if any of those vultures has a chance to fuck around with a celebrity just for the sake of having the most fresh new, they will do and go thoroughly with it.

>>4050
> I'm also aware that I won't be swarmed by people in the streets, but the fear is definitely there.

I'm pondering if any of this is stemming from a sort of repressed desire for fame of your own.

Like, do you actually object to this stuff happening? You were in the business for years, and now suddenly you have a conscience because everybody is coming out with scandalous info? How convenient.

Don't forget, practically speaking, that if you can't come up with supporting evidence, you may both be rejected by the press, and lose the now-tiny circle of remaining acquaintances and connections you have. I am quite sure all manner of news organizations are, at the present moment, being overwhelmed by copycats, liars, and others who may be looking to get their 15 minutes at some high-level person's expense. However, if you have nothing to distinguish yourself that would hold up in court, or any of your information is plausible to begin with (i.e., even if you have actual proof Tom Cruise is a lizard, no-one will believe you) life must go on after that 15 minutes.

I worry that I sound like a psy-op agent trying to dissuade you, having heard of Weinstein's pathetically ineffective JIDF hires, but do know that I view the maddened race towards "fame and fortune" ,the end of which being as meaningless a death as any, with nothing but the same contempt I would hold for a spoiled child beating his head against a wall trying to get it to move; so don't think I am trying to save Hollywood's face. I live about 5 miles southwest from Hollywood, and I know well that the only beauty in it is that it exists at all, whereas the dead and cracked soil of the desert can at least shade lizards within its channels and contribute to Life in its own way. Hollywood is a hive of death-worship that smells like the alcohol-dehydrated piss of the homeless; it defiles and contorts that which creates and supports lives of inner contentment. Contribute to its destruction by all means, but if your motivation is not just, you will destroy yourself with any action you take anyway.

>>4053
Fuck off you edgy faggot. Don't say anything to discourage op. Do you actually think that by shaming op you're accomplishing anything other than a brief moment of catharsis?

Good luck anon and stay safe. We're behind you.

>>4053
Assuming this OP isn't bullshit (but it might be true because Hollywood seems to be full of this kind of shit), you have to remember that even if you object to something your company does or supports, sometimes you just have to deal with it. I'm not really a big fan of the NFL and what it's been doing over people protesting but I just can't quit when I see my employer's logo on an NFL broadcast.

A job is often your lifeline, and as such sometimes the only winning move is to stay quiet.

>>4056
It's easy to be self-righteous and pompous when you're on the outside looking in.

>>4057
Pretty true there. Wrote my whole post thinking if that anon ever worked for someone that did something they disagreed with but couldn't quit because it was their lifeline.

>>4052
I hadn't seriously thought about it before, but I've been looking into it.

>>4053
Absolutely no desire for fame (subconscious or not). Los Angeles may be a metropolis but socially it's a small town. Because of the position I've worked at (for barely two years, not years and years) I'm regularly recognized by other people working in the field. It's usually just enough to get me in a door or on a list but I still shy away from it. The last thing I crave is the spotlight.

And do I object to these things? Yes. I hadn't witnessed anything sexual with my own eyes but after the fact realized that I have access to evidence. And my reason for coming out with this has nothing to do with the ongoing scandals, although I am glad it's happening to these monsters.

What happened at my job was the first domino in this ever-growing situation.

>>4054
>Do you actually think that by shaming op

Shaming? What kind of SJW-laced blue-haired shit-covered drugs have you been smoking? I was/am completely skeptical that OP is some kind of white knight for the abused when he has been a part of/profited from this same system he criticizes, I am not "shaming" him for being something he has no control over.

For example, I could have nothing to do with this sort of thing, so I went into a trade and have been simultaneously financially and ethically successful. If he objects to the dirty underbelly of Hollywood, ask yourself why he would even approach it? Much less feed off of it? This isn't about shaming, this is about him asking himself some serious questions before doing something that has massive potential to destroy what he has worked to build.

If he has truly had a revelation and has decided to separate himself from Hollywood, then it would be wisest to do so calmly and gradually. Just think about it. I don't sound like I'm being nice, but I'm asking OP to seriously consider what is "best" for him in this situation.

>>4056
This is exactly my point.

If OP truly objects to this stuff and he blows up his bridges all at once, he's going to be left with nothing. It would be wiser, for example, to start going to school for engineering or some bullshit, and then use the connections he has made to land an engineering internship from which he could advance in another direction - a further step away from this sort of drama. I work for a fortune 250 company too, so I understand not agreeing with the policies of the organization at large, however I am not telling myself that I am going to campaign against them in the name of righteousness or something fantastical, when in reality I might only be destroying future employment prospects by doing so.

If he has a backup plan, and the right motivations, by all means he should follow his gut, but if he <i>honestly</i> wants to stay in this circle, then maybe "campaigning for righteousness" in a den of criminals and theives isn't in his best interest long-term. He did call his job a "Dream Job" after all, and while dreams are too good to be true, sometimes yes, bare employment is what's needed, bottom-line.

>>4059
>socially it's a small town.

Of course it is. Multiculturalism doesn't work, and in Los Angeles that is more obvious than perhaps anywhere in the world: Little Tokyo, Little Koreatown, isolated Hare Krishna communities, isolated jewish communities, nobody wants to live with people who are unlike them. Nobody. So that is the root of my question to you, and the question for you to yourself: If birds of a feather flock together, are you really just a black bird calling himself a white one?

Act cautiously and be sure you aren't throwing something away that you will find yourself desiring later. If you have evidence, consider who else does - that should massively narrow down the likely leakers. If you are only one of two people with say, access to a CCTV DVR system, you might work to fabricate a "hacking" into it to ensure the footage is seen, but that you are freed of suspicion (this would be MUCH more difficult than it sounds, do not try this) or you might ask Wikileaks on advice on how to leak to them.

>>4060
><i>honestly</i>

Christ, I need to get my forums straight. I meant honestly.

>>4060
>I am not "shaming" him for being something he has no control over.
>Like, do you actually object to this stuff happening? You were in the business for years, and now suddenly you have a conscience because everybody is coming out with scandalous info? How convenient.
>something he has no control over.
>do you actually object to this stuff happening
He didn't feed on Hollywood's dirty underbelly, he fed on Hollywood period. He liked all of the stuff there not related to molestation. You're acting like those two things are so inseparable. If you think that, than you're part of the problem. He shouldn't have to sacrifice his career because he rated on some disgusting perverts. There shouldn't be any consequences for doing so and therefore he shouldn't act like there is. The only reservations he has had about it as a lack of proof and not wanting to be in the spot-light. He wasn't just going to, "come out", before like that would actually do shit. Revealing what he has heard now would actually have an impact however.

>>4060
I can see why people are being hostile to you, but I don't feel that way. I'm definitely a blackbird. Only difference is, unlike the others, I only hurt myself.

Thanks for the advice. You're pretty astute, my dude.

>>4062
Funny you mention that. For years before my time in my company people have been trying to come out with this stuff and bring it to light. Most of the time they were coerced into backing down. Thankfully now the winds of society are shifting.

>>4060
Oh, then I misunderstood you completely.

>>4062
> You're acting like those two things are so inseparable.

If the leadership and major figures of Hollywood were pure, such corruption would not spread in the first place. Prostitution, drugs, etc. would not be a part of it, period.

For example, if I were an employer I would have my employees take a drug test before hiring. I don't care if they have the skills, I want people around me who are healthy and, if they were addicted presently, to be willing to make themselves cleaner, healthier, and better in order to work in my organization. If I were a leader, I would want people I was responsible for to be happy with who they are, and so would truly discourage self-destructive behavior. Not just wait to publicly renounce it whenever someone is caught, then claim they had "no idea" that a scraggly, bruised up, white-nosed, deathly-looking 20 year old woman was addicted to crack.

Hollywood has no such requirements, because not only does it profit from dramatic "Young actress addicted to METH - see how her life was destroyed in this new TV series" types of media, but it actively encourages it by acknowledging that its most powerful members have been engaged in such behavior for decades, yet they expect us to believe that nobody ever saw anything happen in that time. The only thing that tells everyone is, "don't get caught."

>>4065


>I'm definitely a blackbird. Only difference is, unlike the others, I only hurt myself.

That is a more acceptable way of living, but will also only last for so long. The reality, which I have only very recently learned myself, is that one can only withstand self-abuse for so many years before it begins to leak out into the world. For example, I used to self-harm physically, but one time I slipped up and exposed the parallel slashes on my arms, and the whistle was blown. So unless your abuse is of some type that wouldn't make others wary or uncomfortable, then it might hurt your employment anyway. I will explain my reasoning:

Alcoholism will not work forever, as eventually you will show up to work stinking of alcohol, and even if that isn't a problem, it will eventually affect your performance, and if that isn't a problem, eventually you will be late for work because of it, and if that isn't a problem, then one day you will come in late, be stinking, be working like shit, AND Mr. Important Businessman of the Century will be visiting that day, you will make your boss look like an idiot who can't control his people, and he will fire your ass to save his skin. It would be the same with drugs, but this is a generic example of a common form of self-abuse that I have seen a lot of - you may actually have some specific kind of self-abuse which will not bleed out, but I will give a personal example which I think may be more relevant:

I was recently overwhelmed by apathy, and the problem wasn't that I suddenly cared, the problem was that someone had to bring to my attention that I was being too apathetic. I didn't notice that I was openly and casually advocating deadly violence, espousing racist views, or not grooming quite enough. I didn't care. A notice of my dismissal or some kind of lawsuit would have been the first thing I would have seen that would have let me know I was being way too apathetic about what happened to me, what other people thought of me, or why caring about myself was actually directly related to my employment. I __never__ would have figured, but there it was. I was so free from care about what others thought or felt about myself or anything else, that I could have gotten myself fired.

> (OP post) It was a serious emotional trauma but I put off dealing with it by choosing that moment to try my hardest to get a job

This was my same experience, and about 7 years later it just caught up in that it could have directly threatened what I worked for. Failed relationships, hurt feelings, isolation, depression, etc. have all already transpired, but I care less about those than I would if all of my work, time, pain, and loss all went to waste because I lost my job due to true ramifications of that decision.

This reminds me of a "Psychologist to the Stars" that I once met in a meditation circle - people who make hundreds of dollars an hour to literally help household-name celebrities put their socks on in the morning, in one of the most dramatic examples that he could give to me. An A-list celebrity that was so depressed that they called for support around 15 times a day when just getting out of bed, making breakfast, getting in the car, talking to their spouse or partner, etc. became mentally too-much for them to handle.

>>4085
You're missing my point. Just because things are a way that they are, that doesn't mean that they have to be that way. I don't believe that what Hollywood is if you boil it down completely, a place where movies are made, can only exist with all of its corruption and unseemly elements. As such, Hollywood should not be treated as if it is fundamentally filled with degenerate perverts. Working in Hollywood and wanting to keep your job there should therefore not be the same as condoning the bad people that infest it.

>>4092

>You're missing my point. Just because things are a way that they are, that doesn't mean that they have to be that way.

The question is not whether it has to be, but whether or not it is. Have you ever BEEN to Hollywood? This is a sincere question - I want to know if you have walked around the streets of Hollywood for an afternoon on more than one occassion.

>Working in Hollywood and wanting to keep your job there should therefore not be the same as condoning the bad people that infest it.

This portion of the discussion is not about condoning or approving - it's about whether or not that is the place for him.
If OP was living in a crack-house (Hollywood is a fucking crack-house. Again, please answer the previous question), and now he's got evidence about a buddy of his smoking crack, so he reports them to the police do you think his other crack-head friends are going to be very approving of him? To continue using this analogy, I am both asking OP (1)whether he thinks he belongs there or not (2) whether or not he is a crack-head, and/or, (3) if maybe he's just a pot-head (less serious) but if he reports the crack-head anyway, does it really make a difference to the others, in which case he should still be careful and/or consider a simultaneous career move?

>>4093
Hollywood is just a house and it should be treated like a house. Just because there's crackheads in the house, that doesn't make it a crack house and expecting op to treat it like a crackhouse when it doesn't have to be is unfair damn it. Op likes the house. He likes the furniture and amenities. He even likes some of the people in that house. The crack heads in that house can just go fuck themselves and they shouldn't be allowed to ruin the house for op.

>>4096
If you were the person I was replying to, you didn't answer my question about whether or not you have been to Hollywood. If you have only seen what you have seen on TV of it, you have no idea what you're refuting when I call it a crack house. Also, if you've never been to a crack house, you have no idea what you're refuting.

>>4105
Saying that I don't know what I am talking about or don't have the right to an opinion because I personally haven't been to Hollywood or a crack house does not constitute an argument. It doesn't matter if Hollywood was literally hell on Earth, it still doesn't have to be that way, so my point still stands. Op should not live in fear because the place he enjoys being in is infested with vermin. Come up with something better, or stfu.

>>4107

Let's break down your statement instead of taking it as a whole.

>Saying that I don't know what I am talking about because I've never been to Hollywood

Actually, it completely means that you don't know what you're talking about.

>or don't have the right to an opinion because I personally haven't been to Hollywood

Show me where I said this, please. It's an excellent strawman, but I can't recall saying this.

>or a crack house does not constitute an argument.

The crack house analogy was only to illustrate that Hollywood is not the clean, wholesome, loving, place so full of Dreams and Rainbows that anybody makes it out to be.

You are not defending OP or OP's feelings when you are defending Hollywood.
>it still doesn't have to be that way

But it IS that way. Of course it doesn't have to be a hive of degeneracy, and I'm sure at one point it wasn't, but for now, it is.

>Op should not live in fear because the place he enjoys being in is infested with vermin.

Show me where I said OP should live in fear.
I am only trying to help OP make a decision that is best for him, I am just not sugarcoating it. I am not supporting him leaving, or supporting him staying, I am supporting him to think about his decision from many angles, and carefully, before he makes it.

>>4108
Just because I haven't physically been in Hollywood, that doesn't mean shit. I don't see how that is even relevant. You bringing it up as if it is relevant is you telling me that I don't have the right to an opinion, or at least I don't have the right to share it. If you're not saying that, then why try to frame things like I am automatically invalid because of some bullshit criteria that you made up? I'm not defending Hollywood, I am saying that the state of Hollywood should not affect op's decision making. You're telling op to be a coward. People shouldn't only simplemindedly pursuer their self-interest. If op has already decided to come out, don't try to strike doubt in their heart because you personally would choose to play it safe at the expense of your own ideals.

gay larp thread