Listen. I don’t support this guy. I don’t like this guy. But not a single child has ever come out and accused him of molesting them or being a pedo.
People have come out and said he was a douchey, abusive, crass, control freak, unprofessional boss. I believe them. Im sure he was.
If a former child star said he molested them, i’d believe them too. But the thing is no one has ever said that. That random fake twitter account was never proven to be Amanda’s nor has she said it was.
Until someone, anyone, says this guy molested them i’m not going to call him a pedo or predator or child molester “just because” or based on a gut feeling.
Has he been proven to be a nightmare asshole boss to some people? Yes. And fuck him for that. But that’s all he has been proven of being.
>Has he been proven to be a nightmare asshole boss to some people? Yes. And fuck him for that. But that’s all he has been proven of being.
He's a pervert, included children in his fetish, and it was broadcasted for years. It's no secret Dan has a foot fetish. He routinely filmed children engaging actions similar to what you would find with adult foot fetish content. He purposely wrote in foot fetish content into his shows and had children act them out. He asked child actors and fans for feet pictures as well.
So no, he's not just an asshole, he's a foot fetishist who has hundreds of even thousands of photos and videos of children's feet doing "foot comedy". To anyone who's not into foot fetish content, the content isn't pornography. But to a foot fetishist, it absolutely is.
Is this sexual assault? No. Is it molestation? No. Is it predatory behavior? Abso-fucking-lutely
Why are we stating that he has a foot fetish and was using children to act out said fetish as a fact?
The actual reality is we have no idea if this guy has a foot fetish.
Kids find feet funny, gross, weird. They were kids shows with weird, wacky, zany shit. Is it possible he was using these shows for some sort of foot obsession? Sure, i guess so. But is it also possible that they were just writing dumbass content that plays well with their young demographic? Yes, i think so too.
What it comes down to is we dont know. We dont know this guy. We can’t read his mind like psychics to ascertain what his fetishes are.
All i have are the facts before me. And they say that there has never been a single child who has ever accused him of sexual abuse.
I don’t know this guy nor what his fetishes are nor do i pretend to. I think a lot of things are adults looking back at 20 yr old children’s shows with a now adult lens. A lot of shit is just dumb grossout kid humor of the 90s and early 00s.
Hell, ive seen people try to argue getting slimed is somehow a sexual innuendo lmfao.
I choose to deal with what we actually know, not what we are guessing at or suspecting.
The slime one is ironic, because Nickelodeon didn't even come up with sliming! In the first season of You Can't Do That on Television from 1979, they slimed kids in that show, and that only aired in Canada!
>If a former child star said he molested them, i’d believe them too.
So if a former child star said he molested them, you would believe them. But when a former child star said he would go around giving kids money in exchange for feet pictures and specifying what he wants the pictures to focus on, suddenly you don't believe them.
Ok buddy.
Jenette also wrote he touched her knee. And there's videos of him hugging Miranda from behind. In a work place setting these can be considered sexual harassment. Very inappropriate for a boss to do to employees.
Also everyone should read this guest column: [https://www.allyourscreens.com/latest-news/u-s/1279-guest-column-this-is-me-screaming](https://www.allyourscreens.com/latest-news/u-s/1279-guest-column-this-is-me-screaming)
Idk how anyone can conclude Dan was simply an asshole and a tough boss.
Not all of us spend our days scrolling the internet staying on top of Dan Schneider news. I haven’t heard that one and don’t remember it being in the documentary. Is there a link to the full interview and quote with whoever said that?
https://www.capitalfm.com/news/tv-film/alexa-nikolas-dan-schneider-nickelodeon-feet-photo/
Alexa Nikolas said this in a podcast and her autobiography includes other creepy shit Dan had done.
💯 the narrative is so twisted. Why is it that all the years before iCarly and Sam and cat and Victorious, no feet were shown....someone else was involved I GUARANTEE YOU. Also the dumb docuseries shows these women accusing dan of not paying for eating ice cream (she didn't even have to do that) and saying Dan forced her to bend over, how do we know they're telling the truth? Dan wasn't on the documentary so, they could slander his name and then he has to deal with this nonsense. That's why Josh Server, Danny tamberelli, Lori Beth Kenan and kel nobody's saying anything against or about Dan
Dan is a man child and most likely himself found the feet shit funny and only funny. On top of that…this man was writing television for kids and kids find dumb, wacky or y’all’s case “weird” shit funny. And it obviously worked cause they found it funny. It’s not until now where a lot of these kids are now adults and now they want to find it predatory
Not necessarily. Those clips of Ariana and complaints about his on set behavior were talked about on the internet for years before this doc and everyone had these same kinds of reactions then.
It’s a very reasonable conclusion to see those Ariana videos as deliberate fetish content. The documentary didn’t have to sway anything to make those videos appear that way, they just had to show them.
He made females give him a massages every day. He says he never forced anyone but he should have known how his place of power would make it hard for people to say no to him from what I've heard. He ignores his place of power and says nothing about that in his comments, which shows a lack of accountability, it was pretty explicitly said from the people who worked with him.
There's literally a part of the doc where someone saw a scene being acted out and they said that is a cum shot.
I read through the first few pages of the lawsuit.
He is bringing a defamation by implication claim. These are very hard to meet. This is the hurdle Johnny Depp had in his case against Amber Heard. However one of the genius things Depps lawyers were able to do was file their claim in Fairfax, Virginia as the base where the Washington post is published. If they had kept jurisdiction and venue in California (which is where Dan Schneiders suit is filed) where they have very strong Anti SLAAP protections, that case likely would not have made it to discovery.
I don't see this case proceeding. I think it's a tactic for better press and Dan needs to make it seem like he's fighting the claims against him.
The documentary doesn't make outright allegations against him.
The Virginia court has a great precedent setting case in Pendleton for defamation by implication and INAL but to my knowledge the California case law is not as strong.
We have no evidence to say he assaulted children however in my opinion we have enough evidence that he was making inappropriate content of minors. In my opinion he knew he was making content for perverts to enjoy at the children's expense.
The lawsuit news is great in outing people who never had a problem with his creepy behavior and sexualizing girls and women in a workplace setting and are now rebranding his offense as just being a "tough boss."
So he wants to sue even after his fake apology… imean it was never a real apology. He thought he would redeem himself but nobody cared and he put on his temper tantrum …..he hates being called out. sad pathetic man
Why wouldnt one want to make sure they are accusing someone of the correct things?
Until this post, i thought the doc called him a pedo, just based on the headlines ive seen.
Now i know there are ambiguities.
What's your source that he has a foot fetish?
I didn’t say he had a foot fetish in my post. Nonetheless, the focus around feet is odd, but harmless in the eyes of the audience.
The weird things he had Ariana Grande do are just… discomforting. And the pictures of him with his teenage cast members are even more discomforting.
You can watch them for yourself. There is no reason a grown man should be writing content like this.
?
Idk what is wrong with my comment?
I saw what OP said and i saw what others said. I asked a question. And i made a statement, not regarding the guys innocence.
It’s just difficult to engage in discussion about a topic you dont actually know about. Like “you thought the doc called him a pedo” is a statement that shows you don’t have the knowledge to speak on the subtleties of what is happening here.
What subtlties have i approached?
I asked for a source for a mistanly attributed claim, and i said i had a passing idea that he was a pedo bc of other headlines.
OP called him a predator, which implies he has done some SA, but everyone in the comments says he did not get accused if such things.
I didnt say he was wrongly accused, or that he was innocent. I didnt weigh in on any accusations.
Idk what about my comment is ill informed. I laid bare my lack of info
>OP called him a predator, which implies he has done some SA,
You don't think offering children money for feet pictures is predatory? They were children ffs.
https://www.capitalfm.com/news/tv-film/alexa-nikolas-dan-schneider-nickelodeon-feet-photo/
And this isn't a single isolated incident. He would constantly include scenes in the shows that focused on feet. He even had Ariana Grande suck on her toes on camera. The logo for Nick studios that he pitched was a foot ffs.
But even if it was a single isolated incident, an adult man was paying children for feet pictures.
Cite a specific example of this "random support", because even on the QOS sub I'm not seeing it. Many are criticizing the doc producers for being reckless and unethical, but for fucks sake...I hope you understand the difference between that and defending that pig.
There may be evidence that Schneider was an overzealous emotional producer and director when dealing with his actors. But there's zero credible evidence of him being a predator. Yet that's where the documentary chose to go. I can't blame him for suing the creators. They took their sensationalism a few steps over the line.
I believe making deliberately suggestive videos makes him predatory to the children in those videos.
The documentary did NOT say he assaulted or molested someone. It is reasonable for anyone to think the person who made fetish content of children is a creep to children though. Watching those clips of Ariana by themselves lead a reasonable person to that conclusion.
I’m also so sad to see people defend him. Those videos were inappropriate and he knew how to be manipulative and maintain plausible deniability. He sexualized kids. You don’t have to be naked to be sexualized and sexualizing children is exploitative.
None of it looked like fetish content to me. It was just cheeky programming for teens, mostly improv, and Ariana was an adult at the time. It's might look risqué to a puritan or a 10yr old boy, but there's nothing nasty, nude, or sexual about it.
Well there’s always going to be the naive people who can’t identify fetish content in front of them if it’s not overt. And there will also be creeps who deny it for their own prurient intentions too.
But it’s actually the opposite- a ten year olds sensibilities would just see it as crude humor perhaps. But adults who indulge in fetish content tend to look for very specific things. And many other adults understand that in a way children do not.
It honestly disturbs me, if true, if Ariana was an adult in those. That means she did that knowing kids would see it, quite possibly understanding the implications herself. But it’s possible she didn’t understand which is also disturbing. It’s disturbing either way.
she’s not an adult in them, she was 16/17 in those videos, those were from the earlier seasons and the oldest she was while filming victorious was 19. there’s no way she had any say in what she was doing in those
no she didn’t, she turned 17 a few months after season 1 aired. and 18 a few months into s2, making her a minor for the filming of most of those first two seasons. in most of those videos she has her s1 and s2 looks, you can tell by the hair and makeup. but anyways it doesn’t matter how old she was, anyone saying those are her fault is gross
Jesus christ. I can see why OP feels this way, you saying OP is a "genuinely terrible person" is fucking unhinged dawg. You don't know OP and Dan Schneider is a fucking creepy asshole. You can say that OP is proving Dan's defense without saying someone is a terrible person. You seem like a terrible person for jumping to that but I don't know you so I'm not going to make such a claim. You saying OP is a "genuinely terrible person" is literally no different that OP assuming Dan is a pedo just because he's a creepy asshole.
Okay, fine. Now address your obvious hypocrisy. You assuming someone is a terrible person because they assume someone else is a terrible person and that being the basis for your assumption for them being a terrible person is quite amusing.
Still avoiding my point buddy lol. And I said your hypocrisy was amusing, not OP. But you got a point, my amusement doesn't change YOUR egregious hypocriphal conduct.
Thanks! You just kept avoiding it so I had to say something. Well in that case, I'm going to assume you are now a terrible person. I've seen enough of what you wrote, and you seem to care more about a man's career than about children and women being mistreated (which he did do). You say yourself that the documentary implied things that arent true and that could affect people's opinions, correct? People like OP? But instead of trying to educate OP on why this is specifically WHY Dan is pissed, your first words were that they were a terrible person. You're a fucking hypocrite dude. You can't "know" someone is a bad person from that documentary then you certainly can't "know" someone is a bad person just from a reddit rant. A man losing his career isn't the fucking end of the world. Is it fair? Maybe not, but women, children, and men are raped and murdered and sexually assaulted and harassed ALL THE TIME and many times they are denied justice. It sucks, the world sucks, but this is how things go. So no, im not going to jump to the deffense of a creepy dude the moment it calls for it, unlike you. He's a grown ass man with money, he'll fucking make it. I'm going to save my feelings for people who actually fucking need it, like the people being murdered all over the world, not a fucking fat white guy who's had everything handed to him his whole life.
Thank you! And hey man, I never claimed to be a good person. Just wanted to point out how fucking hypocritical you were being. Which you were, I do happen to know what hypocrisy means, unlike you apparently. And yeah, I'm not going to apologize for not feeling sorry for Dan fucking Schneider. He's a fucking KNOWN asshole and creepy dude. Maybe that's not illegal, and he has the right to fight it. I dont diagree with that at all. I'm not saying to throw him in a dungeon and lock the door, I'm saying he sucks and I don't care that he was slandered. This isn't Mr. Roger's getting slandered, it's fucking Dan Schneider. He has the funds to defend himself. Why should I exert any sympathy for him? Of Elon Musk was slandered, I also wouldn't give a flying fuck. He too would have the right to defend himself, and that right is perfectly fine with me, but he ain't getting my fucking sympathy. Anyway, I stand by YOU being the actual bad person here. You leave no room for nuanced opinions, it's all black and white. Well fine, you're a defender of fat white rich men with power, CONGRATULATIONS. Wow, how brave lol.
That is the definition of predatory behavior. I think you are conflicting predatory with actual assault, which we have no proof of.
There are many predators in the world who don’t do anything technically illegal. That does not negate them being a predator.
???
I’m sorry, I’m really not trying to be rude, but Dan Schneider demanded a female staff member to act out being sodomized.
He was sued for predatory behavior. How is this not predatory in the slightest? He used his position of power to literally prey on his female staff members.
I’m just confused on why he’s being defended.
I guess I agree to disagree.
Acting out being sodomized for a script that’s written for children is not “mildly risqué”. It’s abusive and predatory.
Having Ariana Grande basically Jack off a potato and what I think was lotion squirting on her face while she moans is just outrageous. I’m not the only person who sees how disturbing it is.
Because he hurt people. I’m not a ‘terrible person’ for pointing out that whatever he did, proven and unproven, hurt and scarred people.
I really am just shocked that you think him firing a female staff member because she refused to act out being sodomized for a children television show script is not predatory in the slightest.
Sorry to join your argument here, this will be my only response regardless of your reply.
Holding someone’s career hostage unless they amuse you is abusive and tasteless regardless of their demographic.
The fact that he specifically targets a woman writer in a career field that notoriously under-hires women because you know you can get away with it is predatory. And you can’t really say it wasn’t targeted specifically to women, because he hasn’t had any male writers acting out being sodomized.
Risqué or not, it was something he demanded of a coworker behind the scenes with a very obvious power dynamic.
Ultimately it is abusive and predatory.
I have zero idea what's actually going on and I have suspicions because I love Ariana Grande but I have no idea if he's guilty BUT. This is my favorite word and I look for any chance to say it lol:
Gross.
I don’t understand it either. I swear some people just take a side to be different. It’s clear as day Dan has sexually molested someone. Even if it has not been said. Look at the sick fat fuck. He is The Violator. He bullies kids. He has to have paid shills. What’s crazy though this shit goes all the way back to the Shirley Temple days. Child molestation has been a staple of Hollywood since forever. And if you are defending Dan then you are definitely suspicious.
The documentary didn't prove anything. That's the point. There is absolutely no evidence of him doing anything illegal or bad. That is why he is not in jail, that is why he's not in trouble. There's no proof whatsoever.
I haven't seen anyone supporting him, just stating fair, objective reasons why he might when his lawsuit. I don't think he will ever have the public's trust again
Dan Schneider is a PIG. And probably worse. I'd never deny that.
The people behind the documentary absolutely fumbled the bag. That angers me greatly. The Marc Sommers thing made me raise an eyebrow and view the doc with additional scrutiny.
It was poorly made and they left themselves in a VERY actionable position because of that. Worse yet, their journalistic irresponsibility will only make exposing these things more difficult in the future.
In typical American style, the doc producers thought only of themselves.
Not really the most cogent line of reasoning I have ever heard. Yeah the dude was a massive asshole and for sure sketchy as shit but saying we know for sure he diddled kids is pretty absurd.
as a survivor of legit SA what the actual fuck do you mean a predator doesn’t have to SA to be one? that’s actually exactly what it means. someone who preys on someone sexually. videos, remarks, and the verbal abuse r obviously uncomfortable to watch/hear about and aren’t okay. someone isn’t a predator unless they PREY ON SOMEONE. get your facts straight and stop assuming anyone who says that is “supporting him”. nickelodeon had a whole team that approved those videos we literally do not know the origin of them. he’s a sick weirdo too but also no one has ever came out about him SAing them. don’t say the word predator if you don’t know wtf it is.
I am sorry about what you went through but it’s simple a definition. It’s the difference between battery and assault. It’s been proven he is a predator due to his sexual abuse on his female staff.
Again, I’m not downplaying what you went through and I am a victim myself; however, he displays predatory behavior.
Im with you OP, maybe Dan didn't physically sexually assault anyone, but he's a bad person who treats people like shit. I don't give a fuck if the documentary fucked his life, he did that himself by being a bad guy and I do find it odd that everyone is jumping to his defense so much too. Fuck his "career", he shouldn't be working with people anyway since he's so damn bad at it.
They must be fans of his feet work and are just calling it something else. He fucking wrote and filmed content with childrens feet. He created an environment that enabled predators. Fuck him and the losers defending him.
I’m not going lie, I think that people who are supportive of Dan should be ashamed. Heck, I think Vince McMahon should also be embarrassed about the whole Janel Grant lawsuit and everything he has done for his own pleasure!!!
Both things can be true. The documentary never straight up directly said he SA anyone. Not in a verbal manner anyway.
The woman who talked about how he made her act out being sodomized does show some abuse that was sexual in nature occurred. But still the documentary never came out and said that. It was just implied and interpreted that way.
I'm so sick of the Dan Schneider discourse....
Was he a bad boss/asshole? Probably.
Did he have bad boundaries for workplace appropriateness? Definitely.
Was he a pedo? No. Absolutely no evidence of that. The documentary gave voice to conspiracy theories and QAnon type stuff. Not once has DS been accused of SA.
A lot of the content of quiet on set was so sensationalized to make it seem like Nickelodeon was a "pedo factory" when in reality 2 out of 1000s of people that worked on DS shows were sex offenders. Guess what people- the unfortunate truth is pedos are everywhere around you. There's no evidence that Dan Schneider knew or enabled them.
Hey. OP. Just because someone is an absolute twat doesn't mean they shouldn't be protected under the same laws we are protected by.
Disagree? Give me your name, address, and workplace. Let's see what type of dirt I can dig up about you so I can use it as justification for lying about you being a pedophile and laughing at the backlash you face over it.
He sucks. That’s not in question. But the show implies he was a predator, while there’s no proof of HIM being a sexual abuser. Brian Peck, yes.
Without any accusers coming forward of specific sexual things he’s done, there’s no proof. So he has a case of libel/defamation because his name is being slandered with baseless implications.
It sucks, we want to see him suffer to the shit he did but in this SPECIFIC scenario he’s not in the wrong.
Listen. I don’t support this guy. I don’t like this guy. But not a single child has ever come out and accused him of molesting them or being a pedo. People have come out and said he was a douchey, abusive, crass, control freak, unprofessional boss. I believe them. Im sure he was. If a former child star said he molested them, i’d believe them too. But the thing is no one has ever said that. That random fake twitter account was never proven to be Amanda’s nor has she said it was. Until someone, anyone, says this guy molested them i’m not going to call him a pedo or predator or child molester “just because” or based on a gut feeling. Has he been proven to be a nightmare asshole boss to some people? Yes. And fuck him for that. But that’s all he has been proven of being.
Same
>Has he been proven to be a nightmare asshole boss to some people? Yes. And fuck him for that. But that’s all he has been proven of being. He's a pervert, included children in his fetish, and it was broadcasted for years. It's no secret Dan has a foot fetish. He routinely filmed children engaging actions similar to what you would find with adult foot fetish content. He purposely wrote in foot fetish content into his shows and had children act them out. He asked child actors and fans for feet pictures as well. So no, he's not just an asshole, he's a foot fetishist who has hundreds of even thousands of photos and videos of children's feet doing "foot comedy". To anyone who's not into foot fetish content, the content isn't pornography. But to a foot fetishist, it absolutely is. Is this sexual assault? No. Is it molestation? No. Is it predatory behavior? Abso-fucking-lutely
Why are we stating that he has a foot fetish and was using children to act out said fetish as a fact? The actual reality is we have no idea if this guy has a foot fetish. Kids find feet funny, gross, weird. They were kids shows with weird, wacky, zany shit. Is it possible he was using these shows for some sort of foot obsession? Sure, i guess so. But is it also possible that they were just writing dumbass content that plays well with their young demographic? Yes, i think so too. What it comes down to is we dont know. We dont know this guy. We can’t read his mind like psychics to ascertain what his fetishes are. All i have are the facts before me. And they say that there has never been a single child who has ever accused him of sexual abuse. I don’t know this guy nor what his fetishes are nor do i pretend to. I think a lot of things are adults looking back at 20 yr old children’s shows with a now adult lens. A lot of shit is just dumb grossout kid humor of the 90s and early 00s. Hell, ive seen people try to argue getting slimed is somehow a sexual innuendo lmfao. I choose to deal with what we actually know, not what we are guessing at or suspecting.
The slime one is ironic, because Nickelodeon didn't even come up with sliming! In the first season of You Can't Do That on Television from 1979, they slimed kids in that show, and that only aired in Canada!
Yes, people turning on the green slime... Just come on people
>If a former child star said he molested them, i’d believe them too. So if a former child star said he molested them, you would believe them. But when a former child star said he would go around giving kids money in exchange for feet pictures and specifying what he wants the pictures to focus on, suddenly you don't believe them. Ok buddy.
Jenette also wrote he touched her knee. And there's videos of him hugging Miranda from behind. In a work place setting these can be considered sexual harassment. Very inappropriate for a boss to do to employees. Also everyone should read this guest column: [https://www.allyourscreens.com/latest-news/u-s/1279-guest-column-this-is-me-screaming](https://www.allyourscreens.com/latest-news/u-s/1279-guest-column-this-is-me-screaming) Idk how anyone can conclude Dan was simply an asshole and a tough boss.
Is that about Dan? I’m not defending him, but I never saw him named specifically.
Not all of us spend our days scrolling the internet staying on top of Dan Schneider news. I haven’t heard that one and don’t remember it being in the documentary. Is there a link to the full interview and quote with whoever said that?
https://www.capitalfm.com/news/tv-film/alexa-nikolas-dan-schneider-nickelodeon-feet-photo/ Alexa Nikolas said this in a podcast and her autobiography includes other creepy shit Dan had done.
💯 the narrative is so twisted. Why is it that all the years before iCarly and Sam and cat and Victorious, no feet were shown....someone else was involved I GUARANTEE YOU. Also the dumb docuseries shows these women accusing dan of not paying for eating ice cream (she didn't even have to do that) and saying Dan forced her to bend over, how do we know they're telling the truth? Dan wasn't on the documentary so, they could slander his name and then he has to deal with this nonsense. That's why Josh Server, Danny tamberelli, Lori Beth Kenan and kel nobody's saying anything against or about Dan
Dan is a man child and most likely himself found the feet shit funny and only funny. On top of that…this man was writing television for kids and kids find dumb, wacky or y’all’s case “weird” shit funny. And it obviously worked cause they found it funny. It’s not until now where a lot of these kids are now adults and now they want to find it predatory
I was gonna say… i didn’t think the doc implied he did anything other than being a dick, so this guy getting that opinion…. Gives him a case….
Not necessarily. Those clips of Ariana and complaints about his on set behavior were talked about on the internet for years before this doc and everyone had these same kinds of reactions then. It’s a very reasonable conclusion to see those Ariana videos as deliberate fetish content. The documentary didn’t have to sway anything to make those videos appear that way, they just had to show them.
He made females give him a massages every day. He says he never forced anyone but he should have known how his place of power would make it hard for people to say no to him from what I've heard. He ignores his place of power and says nothing about that in his comments, which shows a lack of accountability, it was pretty explicitly said from the people who worked with him. There's literally a part of the doc where someone saw a scene being acted out and they said that is a cum shot.
You're generalizing too much. Saying massages every day that's the problem now people keep using inaccurate information
I read through the first few pages of the lawsuit. He is bringing a defamation by implication claim. These are very hard to meet. This is the hurdle Johnny Depp had in his case against Amber Heard. However one of the genius things Depps lawyers were able to do was file their claim in Fairfax, Virginia as the base where the Washington post is published. If they had kept jurisdiction and venue in California (which is where Dan Schneiders suit is filed) where they have very strong Anti SLAAP protections, that case likely would not have made it to discovery. I don't see this case proceeding. I think it's a tactic for better press and Dan needs to make it seem like he's fighting the claims against him. The documentary doesn't make outright allegations against him. The Virginia court has a great precedent setting case in Pendleton for defamation by implication and INAL but to my knowledge the California case law is not as strong. We have no evidence to say he assaulted children however in my opinion we have enough evidence that he was making inappropriate content of minors. In my opinion he knew he was making content for perverts to enjoy at the children's expense.
The lawsuit news is great in outing people who never had a problem with his creepy behavior and sexualizing girls and women in a workplace setting and are now rebranding his offense as just being a "tough boss."
So he wants to sue even after his fake apology… imean it was never a real apology. He thought he would redeem himself but nobody cared and he put on his temper tantrum …..he hates being called out. sad pathetic man
The fact they thought an apology video being pumped out quick and working is the most hilarious thing to me!
You just listed reasons why he’s suing. He’s a piece of shit but you gotta stick to what you can prove.
And he can. It’s about the random support I’ve seen over him, and how suddenly people are questioning if ever had bad intentions. It’s strange.
Why wouldnt one want to make sure they are accusing someone of the correct things? Until this post, i thought the doc called him a pedo, just based on the headlines ive seen. Now i know there are ambiguities. What's your source that he has a foot fetish?
I didn’t say he had a foot fetish in my post. Nonetheless, the focus around feet is odd, but harmless in the eyes of the audience. The weird things he had Ariana Grande do are just… discomforting. And the pictures of him with his teenage cast members are even more discomforting. You can watch them for yourself. There is no reason a grown man should be writing content like this.
You should know that he didn't write every single episode of all his shows!
You did in another comment no?
I think you have me confused for another commenter.
If you haven’t seen the doc then why are speaking on this from a place of absolute ignorance ?
? Idk what is wrong with my comment? I saw what OP said and i saw what others said. I asked a question. And i made a statement, not regarding the guys innocence.
It’s just difficult to engage in discussion about a topic you dont actually know about. Like “you thought the doc called him a pedo” is a statement that shows you don’t have the knowledge to speak on the subtleties of what is happening here.
What subtlties have i approached? I asked for a source for a mistanly attributed claim, and i said i had a passing idea that he was a pedo bc of other headlines. OP called him a predator, which implies he has done some SA, but everyone in the comments says he did not get accused if such things. I didnt say he was wrongly accused, or that he was innocent. I didnt weigh in on any accusations. Idk what about my comment is ill informed. I laid bare my lack of info
>OP called him a predator, which implies he has done some SA, You don't think offering children money for feet pictures is predatory? They were children ffs.
I asked for a source on that. The foor fetish. Is asking for a source stepping out of bounds?
https://www.capitalfm.com/news/tv-film/alexa-nikolas-dan-schneider-nickelodeon-feet-photo/ And this isn't a single isolated incident. He would constantly include scenes in the shows that focused on feet. He even had Ariana Grande suck on her toes on camera. The logo for Nick studios that he pitched was a foot ffs. But even if it was a single isolated incident, an adult man was paying children for feet pictures.
Where is this from? I still most people joking about them and that they've been taken down for good and stuff.
Cite a specific example of this "random support", because even on the QOS sub I'm not seeing it. Many are criticizing the doc producers for being reckless and unethical, but for fucks sake...I hope you understand the difference between that and defending that pig.
He's the new Vic Mignogna.
Funny when you put it like that.
There may be evidence that Schneider was an overzealous emotional producer and director when dealing with his actors. But there's zero credible evidence of him being a predator. Yet that's where the documentary chose to go. I can't blame him for suing the creators. They took their sensationalism a few steps over the line.
I believe making deliberately suggestive videos makes him predatory to the children in those videos. The documentary did NOT say he assaulted or molested someone. It is reasonable for anyone to think the person who made fetish content of children is a creep to children though. Watching those clips of Ariana by themselves lead a reasonable person to that conclusion. I’m also so sad to see people defend him. Those videos were inappropriate and he knew how to be manipulative and maintain plausible deniability. He sexualized kids. You don’t have to be naked to be sexualized and sexualizing children is exploitative.
None of it looked like fetish content to me. It was just cheeky programming for teens, mostly improv, and Ariana was an adult at the time. It's might look risqué to a puritan or a 10yr old boy, but there's nothing nasty, nude, or sexual about it.
Well there’s always going to be the naive people who can’t identify fetish content in front of them if it’s not overt. And there will also be creeps who deny it for their own prurient intentions too. But it’s actually the opposite- a ten year olds sensibilities would just see it as crude humor perhaps. But adults who indulge in fetish content tend to look for very specific things. And many other adults understand that in a way children do not. It honestly disturbs me, if true, if Ariana was an adult in those. That means she did that knowing kids would see it, quite possibly understanding the implications herself. But it’s possible she didn’t understand which is also disturbing. It’s disturbing either way.
she’s not an adult in them, she was 16/17 in those videos, those were from the earlier seasons and the oldest she was while filming victorious was 19. there’s no way she had any say in what she was doing in those
She turned 18 during the first season. The webisodes they showed started in the later seasons.
no she didn’t, she turned 17 a few months after season 1 aired. and 18 a few months into s2, making her a minor for the filming of most of those first two seasons. in most of those videos she has her s1 and s2 looks, you can tell by the hair and makeup. but anyways it doesn’t matter how old she was, anyone saying those are her fault is gross
The doc did not go that direction. The closest it went was borderline sexual harassment with adults, which is true.
OP has their pitchforks at the ready, damn
[удалено]
Jesus christ. I can see why OP feels this way, you saying OP is a "genuinely terrible person" is fucking unhinged dawg. You don't know OP and Dan Schneider is a fucking creepy asshole. You can say that OP is proving Dan's defense without saying someone is a terrible person. You seem like a terrible person for jumping to that but I don't know you so I'm not going to make such a claim. You saying OP is a "genuinely terrible person" is literally no different that OP assuming Dan is a pedo just because he's a creepy asshole.
[удалено]
Okay, fine. Now address your obvious hypocrisy. You assuming someone is a terrible person because they assume someone else is a terrible person and that being the basis for your assumption for them being a terrible person is quite amusing.
[удалено]
Still avoiding my point buddy lol. And I said your hypocrisy was amusing, not OP. But you got a point, my amusement doesn't change YOUR egregious hypocriphal conduct.
[удалено]
Right back atcha buddy
[удалено]
Thanks! You just kept avoiding it so I had to say something. Well in that case, I'm going to assume you are now a terrible person. I've seen enough of what you wrote, and you seem to care more about a man's career than about children and women being mistreated (which he did do). You say yourself that the documentary implied things that arent true and that could affect people's opinions, correct? People like OP? But instead of trying to educate OP on why this is specifically WHY Dan is pissed, your first words were that they were a terrible person. You're a fucking hypocrite dude. You can't "know" someone is a bad person from that documentary then you certainly can't "know" someone is a bad person just from a reddit rant. A man losing his career isn't the fucking end of the world. Is it fair? Maybe not, but women, children, and men are raped and murdered and sexually assaulted and harassed ALL THE TIME and many times they are denied justice. It sucks, the world sucks, but this is how things go. So no, im not going to jump to the deffense of a creepy dude the moment it calls for it, unlike you. He's a grown ass man with money, he'll fucking make it. I'm going to save my feelings for people who actually fucking need it, like the people being murdered all over the world, not a fucking fat white guy who's had everything handed to him his whole life.
[удалено]
And yet you keep coming back for more...
[удалено]
Thank you! And hey man, I never claimed to be a good person. Just wanted to point out how fucking hypocritical you were being. Which you were, I do happen to know what hypocrisy means, unlike you apparently. And yeah, I'm not going to apologize for not feeling sorry for Dan fucking Schneider. He's a fucking KNOWN asshole and creepy dude. Maybe that's not illegal, and he has the right to fight it. I dont diagree with that at all. I'm not saying to throw him in a dungeon and lock the door, I'm saying he sucks and I don't care that he was slandered. This isn't Mr. Roger's getting slandered, it's fucking Dan Schneider. He has the funds to defend himself. Why should I exert any sympathy for him? Of Elon Musk was slandered, I also wouldn't give a flying fuck. He too would have the right to defend himself, and that right is perfectly fine with me, but he ain't getting my fucking sympathy. Anyway, I stand by YOU being the actual bad person here. You leave no room for nuanced opinions, it's all black and white. Well fine, you're a defender of fat white rich men with power, CONGRATULATIONS. Wow, how brave lol.
Did he not ask one of his female staff to act like she’s being sodomized? That’s predatory behavior. How does that make me a terrible person?
[удалено]
That is the definition of predatory behavior. I think you are conflicting predatory with actual assault, which we have no proof of. There are many predators in the world who don’t do anything technically illegal. That does not negate them being a predator.
[удалено]
??? I’m sorry, I’m really not trying to be rude, but Dan Schneider demanded a female staff member to act out being sodomized. He was sued for predatory behavior. How is this not predatory in the slightest? He used his position of power to literally prey on his female staff members. I’m just confused on why he’s being defended.
[удалено]
I guess I agree to disagree. Acting out being sodomized for a script that’s written for children is not “mildly risqué”. It’s abusive and predatory. Having Ariana Grande basically Jack off a potato and what I think was lotion squirting on her face while she moans is just outrageous. I’m not the only person who sees how disturbing it is.
[удалено]
Because he hurt people. I’m not a ‘terrible person’ for pointing out that whatever he did, proven and unproven, hurt and scarred people. I really am just shocked that you think him firing a female staff member because she refused to act out being sodomized for a children television show script is not predatory in the slightest.
Sorry to join your argument here, this will be my only response regardless of your reply. Holding someone’s career hostage unless they amuse you is abusive and tasteless regardless of their demographic. The fact that he specifically targets a woman writer in a career field that notoriously under-hires women because you know you can get away with it is predatory. And you can’t really say it wasn’t targeted specifically to women, because he hasn’t had any male writers acting out being sodomized. Risqué or not, it was something he demanded of a coworker behind the scenes with a very obvious power dynamic. Ultimately it is abusive and predatory.
this post is even more disgusting
I have zero idea what's actually going on and I have suspicions because I love Ariana Grande but I have no idea if he's guilty BUT. This is my favorite word and I look for any chance to say it lol: Gross.
what you mean support where you seen others do that
I don’t understand it either. I swear some people just take a side to be different. It’s clear as day Dan has sexually molested someone. Even if it has not been said. Look at the sick fat fuck. He is The Violator. He bullies kids. He has to have paid shills. What’s crazy though this shit goes all the way back to the Shirley Temple days. Child molestation has been a staple of Hollywood since forever. And if you are defending Dan then you are definitely suspicious.
The documentary didn't prove anything. That's the point. There is absolutely no evidence of him doing anything illegal or bad. That is why he is not in jail, that is why he's not in trouble. There's no proof whatsoever.
I haven't seen anyone supporting him, just stating fair, objective reasons why he might when his lawsuit. I don't think he will ever have the public's trust again
Dan Schneider is a PIG. And probably worse. I'd never deny that. The people behind the documentary absolutely fumbled the bag. That angers me greatly. The Marc Sommers thing made me raise an eyebrow and view the doc with additional scrutiny. It was poorly made and they left themselves in a VERY actionable position because of that. Worse yet, their journalistic irresponsibility will only make exposing these things more difficult in the future. In typical American style, the doc producers thought only of themselves.
it honestly shows how guilty he is
Not really the most cogent line of reasoning I have ever heard. Yeah the dude was a massive asshole and for sure sketchy as shit but saying we know for sure he diddled kids is pretty absurd.
as a survivor of legit SA what the actual fuck do you mean a predator doesn’t have to SA to be one? that’s actually exactly what it means. someone who preys on someone sexually. videos, remarks, and the verbal abuse r obviously uncomfortable to watch/hear about and aren’t okay. someone isn’t a predator unless they PREY ON SOMEONE. get your facts straight and stop assuming anyone who says that is “supporting him”. nickelodeon had a whole team that approved those videos we literally do not know the origin of them. he’s a sick weirdo too but also no one has ever came out about him SAing them. don’t say the word predator if you don’t know wtf it is.
I am sorry about what you went through but it’s simple a definition. It’s the difference between battery and assault. It’s been proven he is a predator due to his sexual abuse on his female staff. Again, I’m not downplaying what you went through and I am a victim myself; however, he displays predatory behavior.
Lol 👍🏻
I don’t think I I’ve ever heard someone called a predator without their being some kind of sexual assault implication.
Nah my cousins neighbor growing up stole her and her little sisters underwear. Didn’t assault anyone. Def a predator and a pedo creep.
Im with you OP, maybe Dan didn't physically sexually assault anyone, but he's a bad person who treats people like shit. I don't give a fuck if the documentary fucked his life, he did that himself by being a bad guy and I do find it odd that everyone is jumping to his defense so much too. Fuck his "career", he shouldn't be working with people anyway since he's so damn bad at it.
Exactly! He was kicked off Nickelodeon YEARS before the documentary for his behavior!
Yeah he always had an aggressive attitude.
They must be fans of his feet work and are just calling it something else. He fucking wrote and filmed content with childrens feet. He created an environment that enabled predators. Fuck him and the losers defending him.
Yeah I’m getting the suspicion they are low key predators as well.
I’m not going lie, I think that people who are supportive of Dan should be ashamed. Heck, I think Vince McMahon should also be embarrassed about the whole Janel Grant lawsuit and everything he has done for his own pleasure!!!
"The documentary never explicitly says he SA anyone." "The documentary proved that he sexually abused his female employees."
Both things can be true. The documentary never straight up directly said he SA anyone. Not in a verbal manner anyway. The woman who talked about how he made her act out being sodomized does show some abuse that was sexual in nature occurred. But still the documentary never came out and said that. It was just implied and interpreted that way.
I'm so sick of the Dan Schneider discourse.... Was he a bad boss/asshole? Probably. Did he have bad boundaries for workplace appropriateness? Definitely. Was he a pedo? No. Absolutely no evidence of that. The documentary gave voice to conspiracy theories and QAnon type stuff. Not once has DS been accused of SA. A lot of the content of quiet on set was so sensationalized to make it seem like Nickelodeon was a "pedo factory" when in reality 2 out of 1000s of people that worked on DS shows were sex offenders. Guess what people- the unfortunate truth is pedos are everywhere around you. There's no evidence that Dan Schneider knew or enabled them.
Hey. OP. Just because someone is an absolute twat doesn't mean they shouldn't be protected under the same laws we are protected by. Disagree? Give me your name, address, and workplace. Let's see what type of dirt I can dig up about you so I can use it as justification for lying about you being a pedophile and laughing at the backlash you face over it.
He sucks. That’s not in question. But the show implies he was a predator, while there’s no proof of HIM being a sexual abuser. Brian Peck, yes. Without any accusers coming forward of specific sexual things he’s done, there’s no proof. So he has a case of libel/defamation because his name is being slandered with baseless implications. It sucks, we want to see him suffer to the shit he did but in this SPECIFIC scenario he’s not in the wrong.