Support NeoGAF

[Futureman]

Is that one podcast trying to dig up info on why Richard disappeared from public life still going? Seemed like a scummy project to try and profit off someone that doesn't want a public life anymore.

 

[Linkura]

Looks like they had a bad insurance policy and coverage.

https://www.law360.com/articles/562091/gawker-not-covered-for-hogan-sex-tape-row-insurer-says

http://news.psu.edu/story/416994/20...ker-could-have-avoided-hogan-payout-insurance

I bet it is extremely expensive and Denton thought he could always use the first amendment as a shield.

Wow, what a bunch of fucking morons. They were a fucking major media company and only had $1 million in liability insurance? I think the small non-profit I work for has more coverage than that. And we've never been sued.

 

[slit]

I'm part of the public and the court will be a matter of public record. WE are owed answers if that's where he wants to take his claim.

You have no idea if it's even going to go to court, or if it does, what he would need to answer or if it wouldn't even be sealed for reasons unknown you. If it isn't then I'm sure you'll get your chance stick your nose in it, don't worry.

 

[Linkura]

I'm part of the public and the court will be a matter of public record. WE are owed answers if that's where he wants to take his claim.

I'm a Richard Simmons fan and whether or not he's trans is his own damn business. If he is not comfortable confirming or disconfirming the claims to the public, it's his choice.

This will probably be settled and will have NDAs signed and the case sealed. We aren't going to find out. And that's fine with me and it should be with you. Why the fuck do you care whether or not he's trans? The Enquirer makes shit up ALL THE TIME. And even if they're right on this.... who cares? How does this affect anyone or anything except Richard himself?

 

[iammeiam]

Exactly. I was especially miffed by this line:


Maybe he hasn't undergone the full sex-change transition and therefore, by some definition, is not a "woman" anatomically? So then maybe Simmons is more offended by them bursting his bubble of privacy and he's getting back by taking them to court for not being 100% correct in their reporting? It's a possibility.

I hope Simmons is being totally up front just for the sake of making the strongest case against them, but there are a lot of unanswered questions. I've been on his side during the whole time he was asking to be left alone, but if he's going to take them to court then we need clear answers.

I think Simmons being extremely precise in language should be the furthest thing from surprising, if his goal is to establish that the claim is false and that the false claim is offensive not because there's anything shameful about transitioning, but because they are trying to exploit a sensitive issue for sales. It's not "How dare they say I'm transitioning! That's so offensive!", it's "How dare they try to treat something like this as cheap tabloid fodder? It's not just untrue, it's disrespectful of people for who this situation is reality!"

His complaint is pretty up-front that the transition story is entirely false:

""All of these assertions were untrue, and were merely attempts by Mr. Oliveira to gain a profit in exchange for providing a false narrative about Mr. Simmons' leave of absence," continues the complaint. "While pitching around these ideas, Mr. Oliveira was simultaneously blackmailing Mr. Simmons, sending him emails and threatening to destroy his reputation with damaging press coverage unless Mr. Simmons paid Mr. Oliveira to stop."
....

The cover of the article, 100% entirely dedicated to the false story about Mr. Simmons' transition, included an old image of Mr. Simmons from 2013 (before his disappearance), dressed in costume as a female, which he has done openly over the years consistent with his well-known and longstanding burlesque-style entertainment persona," states the complaint. "Accompanying the image of the 2013 photo of Mr. Simmons was a large bold headline, taking up half of the cover page, proclaiming 'Richard Simmons: He's Now a Woman!'"

It's a sensitive issue; Simmons is within his rights to want to hold people accountable for spreading this, while also probably being careful to not give the impression of stigmatizing people who have transitioned. There's zero reason to treat this as evidence that he needs to be 'up front'; dude just wants to be left alone and is trying to be considerate in how he's handling this. It's admirable. If he is transitioning, true the story is still false and exploitive due to misuse of his past photo shoots and relaying a sequence of events that didn't actually happen, but it's silly to use precision of language as a reason to suspect him of being misleading.

 

[hodayathink]

Explain Gawker getting decimated by Hogan then.

Thiel constructed that lawsuit specifically to take down Gawker.

 

[Linkura]

Thiel constructed that lawsuit specifically to take down Gawker.

And looking above, they didn't have anywhere near adequate liability insurance for their industry.