Given they were in the room “alone together” neither of us will ever know. She has claimed that whatever “it” was that it was inappropriate… and that it was credible enough for the entire set to slam down some “Joss can’t ever be allowed alone with her again” rules. It is verifiable that this event happened when she was 14 and in an atmosphere where Joss was King of the Set with total creative control.
To me, it’s clear that something happened, but that that something could not be definitively proven in a court of law. The inference stops just short of claiming sexual assault of a girl who by age had no ability to consent. .
I don’t need for it to be proven in a court of law to have an opinion about whether he should be in jail. But there are plenty of things that he might do short of actual sexual assault or other criminal act that might still justify not letting him be alone with her. I’d be satisfied just knowing what she alleged that he did.
What I would say is that if what he did was so bad that he was barred from being alone with her, then at minimum, he should have been fired. So I do think that what they did didn’t go far enough, but I don’t know enough to know whether he should be in jail.
There really is nothing in that article backing up what you and its title are declaring. Making fun of how crappy men can be is not allying with feminism.
Maybe. Maybe not. Maybe he made an inappropriate joke and she felt uncomfortable. Gross and immoral? Probably. But I think it’s jumping the gun to assume he did something illegal to Trachtenberg.
Yes, or it could have been along the lines of what Carpenter has talked about, but done to a teenaged girl. Berating and destroying self esteem, and generally being emotionally abusive toward a 14-year-old might have been more obvious, and triggered more reaction than doing it to adult women.
It also could have been something jail-worthy – who knows. But illegality is not the only explanation.
If I walked in on him and my daughter with him sitting close and suggesting they go back to his mansion to read lines, there’s no damn way he’s being left alone with her again and also no way I can really call the cops on him. There’s massive room for non-illegal stuff. I do assume her parents aren’t worried Whedon might try to sell her a reverse mortgage.
Anthony Head has come out to say that he didn’t see anything untoward but - and this is important - is not in any way suggesting it didn’t happen. Mostly he’s wondering if he missed something he should have taken notice of.
I can’t help thinking of Billy Graham. He had a similar rule. In fact, as a traveling entertainer, he had a team and a procedure to ensure that he was not allowed into a room alone with a young women. But it wasn’t a rule that was enforced on him: it was his rule that he had, so that he didn’t turn out like Jimmy Swaggart.
Whatever temptation Graham may have felt, it was also a prudent move, as I’m sure any number of people would have been willing to blackmail a man such as himself by creating the appearance of a tawdry situation.
While I’m sure that was considered, reading biographical material makes it clear that he consciously decided to structure his life in a way that would lead to logical outcomes, including his personal and economic relationships. He started thinking about his own behavior long before he was famous enough for anybody else to care about it. BG was smart enough to known that he wasn’t immune from common personal failures. And – you may laugh – but structured behavior is a well-known religious practice and a well-known personal development practice, so he wasn’t really striking out in new directions.
