Why you won't see these women under the Golden Globes spotlight on Monday.

Within hours of the Golden Globes nominees being announced, there is the inevitable talk about who’s been overlooked. Snubbed, as they say.

But there are two actresses – and likely many more – who have been denied their shot at a victory speech more than 20 years in a row.

And not because their performances were underappreciated, but because they were allegedly denied the chance to give them in the first place.

Harvey Weinstein’s famous accusers, Ashley Judd and Mira Sorvino.

The end of 2017 saw the career and reputation of powerhouse Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein spectacularly crumble beneath the weight of more than 100 allegations of sexual harassment, sexual misconduct and rape.

According to a stunning exposé in The New York Times detailing the harassment claims, the now 65-year-old displayed a variety of disturbing, inappropriate behaviour to women in his employ, including “appearing nearly or fully naked in front of them, requiring them to be present while he bathed or repeatedly asking for a massage or initiating one himself.”

Trapped, intimidated, many reported feeling powerless to speak up, both at the time and years later.

As the collective of famous Hollywood women behind Time’s Up, an initiative launched this week in an effort to curb workplace sexual harassment, wrote, “We [still] harbour fear that no one will believe us, that we will look weak or that we will be dismissed; and we are terrified that we will be fired or never hired again in retaliation.”

mira sorvino ashley judd weinstein
Ashley Judd and Mira Sorvino. Images: Getty.

Ashley Judd and Mira Sorvino both suspected they had been blackballed in this way after rejecting Weinstein's advances or telling colleagues about his behaviour.

Sorvino, a 1995 Oscar winner and mother of four, told The New Yorker that she attempted to confide in a female employee at Weinstein's company, Miramax, that he had touched her inappropriately and attempted to pressure her into a relationship with him.

"Her reaction was as though I was suddenly radioactive for daring to bring it up, which gave me little encouragement," the 50-year-old wrote for Time.

Judd's experience was similar. She told The New York Times that she had been invited to a breakfast meeting at Weinstein's Beverly Hills hotel room early in her career, where he allegedly "appeared in a bathrobe and asked if he could give her a massage or she could watch him shower".

“I said no, a lot of ways, a lot of times, and he always came back at me with some new ask,” the 49-year-old said. “It was all this bargaining, this coercive bargaining.”

LISTEN: What happened with Harvey Weinstein? (Post continues below.)

Then finally, in December, another powerful name supported their claims. Director Peter Jackson told media that while developing his iconic Lord of the Rings trilogy in 1998 he had been instructed by Miramax that Judd and Sorvino were "a nightmare to work with and we should avoid them at all costs."

"I now suspect we were fed false information about both of these talented women and as a direct result their names were removed from our casting list,” he told New Zealand outlet Stuff.

Weinstein has denied Jackson's claims, telling media he “had no input on the casting whatsoever”.

But to Sorvino it was validation. She tweeted: “Just seeing this after I awoke, I burst out crying. There it is, confirmation that Harvey Weinstein derailed my career, something I suspected but was unsure. Thank you Peter Jackson for being honest. I’m just heartsick.”

How frequently this occurred in the women's careers is and will remain unknown. How may roles they must have missed out on, and accolades missed.

In the meantime, both have vowed to fight so that other women may be spared the same fate.

"I will fight so that my daughters and sons will not have to endure what I and every other generation that has come before have had to," Sorvino wrote in TIME. "So that all of our children’s success will not be determined by their willingness to submit to foul sexual advances, but the quality of their work and the integrity of their spirits."

00:00 / ???