ALL Y&R Michael Muhney Firing UPDATES No bash.

Y&R lovers! Here's your chance to rant and rave about everything in Genoa City!
User avatar
Tambam
Posts: 8404
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 12:57 pm

Re: Y&R' Michael Muhney Firing UPDATE

Postby Tambam » Sat Jan 04, 2014 9:13 pm

Quote Victor Fanatic: Don't know for sure if it's true, but it happens a lot in the workplace. It happened to me. Some blamed me. I was the victim, not him. He cornered me in a elevator. Stop blaming the Victim. I feel for her. :0


It happened to me too. And the same age pretty much matched as well. And it was the CEO of the company. And guess what. I didn't say anything to anyone. I'm not saying MM did it. But if this is true.... kudos to HK for her strength to come forward and stand up for herself. I think that's pretty amazing.

GGC7
Posts: 1813
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2014 8:12 pm

Re: Y&R' Michael Muhney Firing UPDATE

Postby GGC7 » Sat Jan 04, 2014 9:14 pm

I don't blame HK or MM because I really don't know what has happened for sure. But I do know Y&R, the producers, Sony and CBS have handled this horrible and they do not seem willing to correct the problem or set the record straight so I think they are the problem. And they do not care what we say or think. So Sad :(

User avatar
Pravda
Posts: 356
Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 10:14 am

Re: Y&R' Michael Muhney Firing UPDATE

Postby Pravda » Sat Jan 04, 2014 9:23 pm

It's insulting that men just brush off $exual harassment when women go too far. Unfortunately many men are viewed as soft or weak if they report it. Many women don't even respect men and see them as less manly so they keep their mouths closed. In this case MM may fall up because some women will find him $exier than ever. Such double standards on both sides. An unfortunate fallout.

Ari1
Posts: 2680
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2013 9:30 pm

Re: Y&R' Michael Muhney Firing UPDATE

Postby Ari1 » Sat Jan 04, 2014 9:25 pm

Quote Ari1: I'm going to relate my knowledge of sexual harassment for those of you who are interested. In my line of work, we are required to take sexual harassment course once a year. Also, the previous university I worked for was sued for discrimination, and as part of the settlement, everyone associated with the university was required to attend lectures by discrimination attorneys every semester. (The lawsuit had nothing to do with the administration or professors. It had something to do with the cleaning crew, but nevertheless, all members associated with the university were required to attend)

As defined by the Supreme Court discrimination and sexual harassment are defined as anything that makes someone feel uncomfortable. The definition is purposely made broad so as to give the courts leeway. Each case must stand on it's own merits. So something seemingly as benign as paying a coworker a compliment all the way to telling an employee the he/she must have sex in order to keep his/her job all fall under this umbrella. There is a lot of grey area.

Other things that are taken into consideration are the workplace environment. For example, is the workplace permissive and does it allow employees to make sexual comments without being reprimanded? Are some employees allowed to make sexual comments or allowed to cop a feel and it's brushed off as good fun? (JC admits to doing all of this throughout her tenure on y&r. Some might see this as silly harmlessness, but no company should allow such behavior to continue or the company could be liable, not just the individual.)

Also the context in which the sexual harassment happened must also be considered. I will give some hypothetical examples. Did one employee say you spilled something on your chest and he tries to wipe it off? Or were the employees discussing boobs and one employee grabs another's boobs and says "well you have big honkers." Or did one employee lure someone into his office and start fondling the breast of the victim?

I give these examples to show how grey sexual harassment is. It's never black and white. An investigation must be pursued and all evidence must be brought forward. Each case is handled differently according to all of the evidence brought to light. Punishments can range from simple reprimands to termination depending on the severity of the incident. But both sides should be allowed to present their side. If someone makes an allegation, the other party cannot be fired without an ensuing investigation.

My point is there is always three sides to every story, person 1, person 2, and the truth. I reserve judgment until the entire story is brought forth. I feel sorry for both parties who get their reputations dragged through the mud based on unsubstantiated rumors.


One reason why I bring this up is MM, in his interview, did not say he was fired for sexual harassment. He was told that tptb wanted to give the character a break and they would recast in 3-6 months. Any actor can be fired for any reason at the end of the 13 week contract. People should not read into why he was fired when it could strictly be story line dictated. Tptb don't have to give a reason. Now if he were told it was bc he sexually harassed a coworker, he would be allowed to make a case for himself. The fact that they told him his termination was storyline dictated and not for any other reason is suspect. The fact that they come out now saying there was cause is very convenient. If there was cause, he should have been allowed to defend himself. Apparently he was not given that right. They told him it was for story line purposes and then they leak all these rumors to cover their butts. That is the problem I have with this. No person should be convicted on allegations alone. We all have rights, and are innocent until proven guilty. He, apparently, was not given that chance.

GGC7
Posts: 1813
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2014 8:12 pm

Re: Y&R' Michael Muhney Firing UPDATE

Postby GGC7 » Sat Jan 04, 2014 9:34 pm

Very good point

Sudsy Sue
Posts: 575
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 2:13 pm

Re: Y&R' Michael Muhney Firing UPDATE

Postby Sudsy Sue » Sat Jan 04, 2014 9:34 pm

Well, here's one for ya! :~ examiner.com is saying Hunter King made advances toward MM and was rebuffed by MM so she went to the higher ups to make trouble for him! hmmm!

Arabella
Posts: 211
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 10:30 am

Re: Y&R' Michael Muhney Firing UPDATE

Postby Arabella » Sat Jan 04, 2014 9:34 pm

Quote Ari1:
Quote Ari1: I'm going to relate my knowledge of sexual harassment for those of you who are interested. In my line of work, we are required to take sexual harassment course once a year. Also, the previous university I worked for was sued for discrimination, and as part of the settlement, everyone associated with the university was required to attend lectures by discrimination attorneys every semester. (The lawsuit had nothing to do with the administration or professors. It had something to do with the cleaning crew, but nevertheless, all members associated with the university were required to attend)

As defined by the Supreme Court discrimination and sexual harassment are defined as anything that makes someone feel uncomfortable. The definition is purposely made broad so as to give the courts leeway. Each case must stand on it's own merits. So something seemingly as benign as paying a coworker a compliment all the way to telling an employee the he/she must have sex in order to keep his/her job all fall under this umbrella. There is a lot of grey area.

Other things that are taken into consideration are the workplace environment. For example, is the workplace permissive and does it allow employees to make sexual comments without being reprimanded? Are some employees allowed to make sexual comments or allowed to cop a feel and it's brushed off as good fun? (JC admits to doing all of this throughout her tenure on y&r. Some might see this as silly harmlessness, but no company should allow such behavior to continue or the company could be liable, not just the individual.)

Also the context in which the sexual harassment happened must also be considered. I will give some hypothetical examples. Did one employee say you spilled something on your chest and he tries to wipe it off? Or were the employees discussing boobs and one employee grabs another's boobs and says "well you have big honkers." Or did one employee lure someone into his office and start fondling the breast of the victim?

I give these examples to show how grey sexual harassment is. It's never black and white. An investigation must be pursued and all evidence must be brought forward. Each case is handled differently according to all of the evidence brought to light. Punishments can range from simple reprimands to termination depending on the severity of the incident. But both sides should be allowed to present their side. If someone makes an allegation, the other party cannot be fired without an ensuing investigation.

My point is there is always three sides to every story, person 1, person 2, and the truth. I reserve judgment until the entire story is brought forth. I feel sorry for both parties who get their reputations dragged through the mud based on unsubstantiated rumors.


One reason why I bring this up is MM, in his interview, did not say he was fired for sexual harassment. He was told that tptb wanted to give the character a break and they would recast in 3-6 months. Any actor can be fired for any reason at the end of the 13 week contract. People should not read into why he was fired when it could strictly be story line dictated. Tptb don't have to give a reason. Now if he were told it was bc he sexually harassed a coworker, he would be allowed to make a case for himself. The fact that they told him his termination was storyline dictated and not for any other reason is suspect. The fact that they come out now saying there was cause is very convenient. If there was cause, he should have been allowed to defend himself. Apparently he was not given that right. They told him it was for story line purposes and then they leak all these rumors to cover their butts. That is the problem I have with this. No person should be convicted on allegations alone. We all have rights, and are innocent until proven guilty. He, apparently, was not given that chance.


THIS is exactly why I've maintained that the charges are bogus in the first place. They NEVER considered the length and breath of the backlash to his firing. I actually DO believe that it was story driven and that I will repeat once again, JFP was clearing the decks of anyone who would take away from her golden boy Steve Burton. Now I really like SB as an actor but I'm sorry, MM and BM will always make him look boring and JFP can't have that. Her friends are being hired here, the same as she's done before. Her MO precedes her and I guess they don't like people pointing those little fun facts out here on the boards for all the world to see!

Hence the relentless push back against the fans defending MM...

User avatar
velocity
Posts: 5411
Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2010 8:22 pm

Re: Y&R' Michael Muhney Firing UPDATE

Postby velocity » Sat Jan 04, 2014 9:36 pm

Quote lilie:
Quote velocity: I think MM was allowed to finish his s/l on a closed set, with only the actors involved in the s/l. HHK is not in this s/l and this is why he worked the last few days. My opinion only. Blaming the victim is disgusting and heartless.


Well, ;( to the bold, who's blaming HK? 8)

We're simply saying that this "POOR" child could have very well been used (as a previous poster mentioned) in this conspiracy.... ;( ;(


I find this statement extremely sad, Wow.

Arabella
Posts: 211
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 10:30 am

Re: Y&R' Michael Muhney Firing UPDATE

Postby Arabella » Sat Jan 04, 2014 9:37 pm

Quote Sudsy Sue: Well, here's one for ya! :~ examiner.com is saying Hunter King made advances toward MM and was rebuffed by MM so she went to the higher ups to make trouble for him! hmmm!


All of her defenders have said in whispers that there's more to the story. I bet this isn't what they had in mind though! LOL That's the trouble with rumors...they take on a life of their own.

Arabella
Posts: 211
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 10:30 am

Re: Y&R' Michael Muhney Firing UPDATE

Postby Arabella » Sat Jan 04, 2014 9:38 pm

Quote velocity:
Quote lilie:
Quote velocity: I think MM was allowed to finish his s/l on a closed set, with only the actors involved in the s/l. HHK is not in this s/l and this is why he worked the last few days. My opinion only. Blaming the victim is disgusting and heartless.


Well, ;( to the bold, who's blaming HK? 8)

We're simply saying that this "POOR" child could have very well been used (as a previous poster mentioned) in this conspiracy.... ;( ;(


I find this statement extremely sad, Wow.


What's sad is that you have a man with a family tried and convicted without any proof! Why can't you give BOTH people in this very sad state of affairs a break and give them BOTH the benefit of the doubt? WHY so one sided?


Return to “The Young and the Restless”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Ichimon2 and 2 guests