And women who were sexually abused as children frequently “act out” sexually as teenagers and young adults - sometimes becoming aggressively promiscuous at a very young age. This happened with my younger sister and several of her friends - although I did not recognize it until I was much older and I didn’t know the details until I reconnected with some of her childhood friends recently.
First of all, nope. Nobody has made this argument (but I notice it’s a convenient strawman for deflecting from the point of this thread). Secondly, I was questioning whether the media and public would subject Argento to the same level of scrutiny that men accused of sexual assault receive, not whether they would cover it at all. A totally legitimate question given the story was just breaking and NYT was the first legitimate news source to report the allegations at the time I made the thread.
It seems that my suspicions have been (somewhat) proven right, and not just by the defensive responses in this thread: Asia Argento allegations: the misconception of the “perfect victim” - Vox
https://mobile.twitter.com/rosemcgowan/status/1031535197433602048
https://mobile.twitter.com/RoArquette/status/1031414164072292353
Why are people so focused on emphasizing Argento’s victimhood? Yes, she is still a victim of rape herself, no one has suggested otherwise. But why do some people think that merits more attention than her sexually assaulting a boy? Does anyone care this much when male rapists are revealed to have been victims of the same crimes they have committed?
People can beg and plead all they want to not allow this affect their perception of #MeToo, the onus is on the leaders and supporters of the movement to not give the rest of the world the impression that a separate standard exists for female perpetrators. And they can do that by not downplaying Asia Argento’s actions and distancing themselves from her. #MeToo is already on shaky ground, if this isn’t properly handled there goes the movement.
But like Aspidistra said, feminism has spoken up about sexual assault long before any social media based movement existed, and its credibility will far outlast #MeToo. Which goes to show that a social movement that begins on Twitter and doesn’t evolve very far from that point isn’t one destined to have a long shelf life. And that sucks, because Tarana Burke founded #MeToo not as a silly little hashtag, but as a sincere campaign for awareness and it’s been hijacked and perverted into this nonsense.
That Vox link doesn’t support what you’re saying, by my reading. That a few celebrities had the wrong takes on Argento doesn’t invalidate the movement in any way. The “sincere campaign for awareness” has been working, and that a prominent accuser has also been credibly accused of assault doesn’t harm this in any way.
I se no evidence that #MeToo (which, in my understanding, can’t be separated from the broader movement to identify and repudiate sexual assaulters and harassers in workplaces both prominent and not-so-prominent) is on “shaky ground” at all. Pretty much all the takes on Jezebel and other very lefty/feminist/pro-#MeToo websites have been highly critical of Argento and supportive of her accuser, just as they have been for other credibly accused celebrities.
Deny and blame the dead guy. How could this have gone any other way?
That Vox article reduces being an alleged rapist to being an “imperfect victim” and pleads for the story to not detract from Asia being a victim, almost as if this should take precedence over her actions. Secondly, a lot of people are grumbling that #MeToo is being weaponized as a vehicle for vengeance because anyone accused of sexual misconduct is subject to mob justice before they get a chance to prove their innocence (if they’re male of course). #MeToo in its inception has done a lot of goodwill because the conversation on abuse and harassment in the workplace (which is what it was initially about) was long overdue. But now it’s in danger of becoming a caricature of itself.
I’ve read the comment section on Jezebel, and there are just as many people attributing her crime to her being raped (amongst other shitty excuses) as they are people denouncing her actions. In fact, the negative comments seem to be in response to those rationalizing Argento’s actions. So my point still stands. The same people quick to call for the head of any man accused of wrongdoing suddenly acknowledge nuance when the accused is a woman.
Yeah, I was just about to post this: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/article-asia-argento-denies-sexual-assault-says-bourdain-made-payment/
This is really not someone #MeToo advocates should die on a hill for. She appears to exhibit the same sociopathic traits as Weinstein, which is quite ironic.
And I’m rather disgusted by the “there’s no such thing as a perfect victim” rhetoric. We’re not talking about someone accused of sleeping with her best friend’s husband, we’re talking about an alleged RAPIST. Someone who groomed a child for eventual abuse, no less. Apparently asking that rape victims not be sexual predators themselves is too high a moral standard to demand of them?
Not at all by my reading.
I’ve heard such complaints since the movement started, and I don’t think they’re any more reasonable now than they were then. False accusations are always a danger, but I don’t see how that’s relevant with Argento, or that there’s any evidence that there accusations are more likely to be false now than in the past.
I’ve seen very little defense or justification for Argento on Jezebel or elsewhere. And what little there has been has been very quickly pounced upon, by my reading. That there may be some non-zero number of hypocrites among them demonstrates nothing more than that #MeToo supporters are also human beings.
If this is what you’re getting from that, then you’re misinterpreting it. “There are no perfect victims” means that imperfections don’t take away from someone’s credible accusations. Argento’s accusations against Weinstein are very credible and must be listened to and treated seriously. So are Bennet’s accusations against Argento. The new allegations don’t take away from the allegations against Weinstein in any way whatsoever.
Having been raped by Weinstein isn’t some sort of privileged status that you can lose if it turns out you have also raped someone else. It’s an actual thing that happened.
But who said it did? Why is this warning deemed necessary when no one has suggested these revelations exculpate Weinstein? It’s a knee jerk strawman defense meant to downplay the severity of Argento’s crimes. There is no context that proves defending Argento’s victim status was a matter of urgency in the reporting of the allegations against her. It doesn’t come across as anything but a weird double standard in the way women accused of sexual assault are assessed compared to how men are.
I don’t understand. What are you suggesting? That reports on Argento should not mention Argento’s credible allegations against Weinstein? And if they mention that, then that’s somehow a defense or downplaying of the severity of Argento’s crimes? If that’s what you mean, then I strongly disagree.
There is no moral standard that must be met in order for a rape victim to receive justice.
That defending her victimhood in the context of her being accused of victimizing another person is wholly unnecessary when it’s never been called into question, and comes across as strawmanning more than anything else. I can’t get any clearer than this.
Please point to where in my post I suggested they didn’t. This borders on deliberate obtuseness.
I’ve seen plenty of MeToo critics online attack the movement and suggest she no longer counts as a victim.
So I don’t think that’s a straw man.
You can find contrarian trolls with shitty hot takes on virtually any topic. That doesn’t mean it’s a widely held view that needed to be debunked. Someone like Weinstein sure as hell is in no danger of being presumed an innocent man by the general public because one of his accusers might be a predatory shitbag like him.
So yes, it’s a strawman meant to distract from Asia’s actions, and it’s working. Are we discussing how she groomed her accuser from childhood? Are we talking about the audacity of her to make a deceased man unable to defend himself responsible for her payoff? No, the conversation is centered (once again) on her story as a victim and not Jimmy Bennet, the man she is accused of taking advantage of as a boy.
This op-ed articulates my point much better than I could: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/21/opinion/asia-argento-avital-ronell-weinstein.html
There’s plenty of discussion about Argento’s wrongdoings. Most of what I’ve read, in fact, has been about the terrible way she manipulated Bennett.
Absolutely. And since Asia just torched her career she’s going to need Weinstein’s money to cover her rape of Jimmy.
It’s the Hollywood circle of life.
Agreed and it’s not just shitty contrarian trolls like the lately cornfielded visitor. Too many comments and posts around the web with an underlying tone of schadenfreude against not just Argento, who does have to answer for this, but against #MeToo itself.
The thing that has to be remembered, is that evidence that sexual advantage-taking was pervasive and widespread does not negate that it fell especially hard upon women and that high-powered men were most often the culprits.
It also doesn’t negate that it’s unethical and criminal, regardless of age, race, or gender.
Well I’m not saying that and I don’t know that I’ve seen anyone saying that. Where did you get this idea?
Are you taking the position that acknowledging the accusations against Argento automatically leads to excusing Weinstein?
Because I would have to call bullshit on anyone putting that idea out there.