[amphibian]

It's a bad thing that Asia Argento assaulted someone and possibly groomed him. It's still a bad thing that Harvey Weinstein assaulted her.

Both things can be true and very, very depressing to contemplate.

One thing that's unfortunately true is that those who are most vulnerable are often targeted for exploitation and assault by those looking for that. There is also perpetuation of abuse and pain by victims too.

Argento should have been extremely upfront about this, but she wasn't. That's wrong and what she did was wrong.

[worry]

Totally agreed. Also pretty certain that Weinstein affiliates or sympathizers dug this up and dropped it ahead of his trial to muddy the waters for people who can't hold two thoughts in their head at the same time.

[worry]

I really hope it doesn't, but the first Cosby trial ended up hung and the second required a bunch more accusers giving testimony to overcome it.

And if I read you right, you're talking about cycles of abuse, right? Definitely a real phenomenon, but I don't know the timeline between these two events offhand (Weinstein/Argento vs. Argento/Bennett), and I don't know if Argento had a pre-Weinstein history of being abused. I do know that one of the more unseemly details is that Argento directed and played the mom of Bennett in an earlier movie when he was 7, so they weren't strangers or merely new coworkers when she assaulted him at age 17. The age gap is huge and there are definitely potential power dynamics at play. Regardless, none of it exonerates Weinstein.

[QuickTidal]

PARADISE is here bitches, on 21 August 2018 - 02:55 AM, said:

Luv2B_Sassy, on 21 August 2018 - 02:18 AM, said:

Totally agreed. Also pretty certain that Weinstein affiliates or sympathizers dug this up and dropped it ahead of his trial to muddy the waters for people who can't hold two thoughts in their head at the same time.

It’s certainly juicy but I don’t see it affecting his outcome(if it’s still ongoing?) a single bit. Someone was clearly worth their high pay uncovering that. Sadly all to many victims become the same type of person.

I mean she wasn't really hiding the relationship though. The photo was on her Instagram of them both without tops on (it's gone now apparently). I mean the monetary payoff had to be found out, but otherwise...she wasn't shy about the relationship.

Aside from this...it makes me wonder in fresh depression about Bourdain's death. The scuttle is that those who knew them said that Bourdain and Argento were fighting pretty badly right before his suicide...like I've heard that they had a HUGE blowout the night he did it. And so now of course I'm wondering if he found out about the 17-year old, and the payoff...and it drove an already depression-tendencied person over the edge. Ugh. If that's the case, double fuck Argento for helping take Bourdain from the world.

Also, since he was 17 in California, this was a crime...which caused me to be curious and look up the "legal age" in Italy...which is 14. WTF is wrong with Italy, man?

@Worry

Just to unmuddle the timeline a bit with film nerdery.

Argento / Weinstein would have been way back in 1998 during the production of B. MONKEY.

Argento / Bennett would have started as a friendship when she played his mother in 2004's THE HEART IS DECEITFUL OF ALL THINGS (when he was about 7), and then the abuse happened in 2013 (I don't think they were in a film together at the time, I think she just maintained a friendship with him since 2004).

As to pre-Weinstein abuse...the only thing that could point to it would be that her father was a famous Italian horror/shock director Dario Argento, and as such she MAY have attended parties, or gatherings of film people during which that sort of thing may have gone on. Who knows.

I feel like this is definitely at least partly "cycle of abuse" from Weinstein though since the MO's are very much the same, grooming, alcohol and drug plying ect. but it could drift to earlier incidents for sure.

And the power dynamics at play are interesting to me...because when I became aware of Argento in the 90's (1998's NEW ROSE HOTEL), I developed a super huge crush on her (I was 21 at the time)...and I even met her at a TIFF screening a year or so later, and was just as in awe of her in person as I was watching her on screen. So I could TOTALLY see how she could lull a younger guy into her machinations just by exuding a very sexual nature as a human...and that very much speaks to the idea of "power dynamics"...another thing that can be attributed to Weinstein, simply in a non-looks way with him.

Anyways, it's fucked up all around.

EDIT: UPDATE

Argento has responded. She claims the allegations are false, and that the encounter never took place. That Bennett is lying and was extorting Argento during the original Weinstein uncovering so she claims that Bourdain paid Bennett off to avoid his supposed lies coming out in the throws of MeToo and casting one of its larger visible famous proponents (Argento) into a bad light and damage the movement.

So...I'm not buying it. Argento CLEARLY had some kind of relationship with him...or why did that picture disappear from her 2013 instagram post where she referred to him as her "love"...

And we need to keep believing accusers/victims...because otherwise the cycles will repeat of people not wanting to come forward.

This post has been edited by QuickTidal: 21 August 2018 - 03:32 PM

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

'Bennett met Argento at age 7, when he played her son in The Heart Is Deceitful Above All Things, which she directed, starred in, and co-wrote. In the documents obtained by the Times, Bennett, who did not speak to Severson directly, says Argento became a mentor and mother figure to him.In 2013, when Bennett was 17 and Argento was 37, a family member drove him to meet Argento at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Marina Del Rey, California, according to the documents. Argento asked the family member to leave, gave Bennett alcohol, and performed oral sex on him, the documents say. Then she climbed on top of him and had intercourse with him. The age of consent in California at the time was 18.'

Which part of this is he referring to as 'assault' exactly? California's ridiculous age of consent? Did she get him drunk? Did she threaten him? Is it that she grabbed his penis and put it in her mouth before he could respond? Or are famous people not allowed to have sex with anyone who has worked with them in the past or might work with them or people they know in the future? Or is it that he didn't provide explicit verbal consent or display sufficient enthusiasm?

This post has been edited by Azath Vitr (D'ivers: 21 August 2018 - 04:34 PM

[JPK]

Azath Vitr (D, on 21 August 2018 - 04:32 PM, said:

'Bennett met Argento at age 7, when he played her son in The Heart Is Deceitful Above All Things, which she directed, starred in, and co-wrote. In the documents obtained by the Times, Bennett, who did not speak to Severson directly, says Argento became a mentor and mother figure to him.In 2013, when Bennett was 17 and Argento was 37, a family member drove him to meet Argento at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Marina Del Rey, California, according to the documents. Argento asked the family member to leave, gave Bennett alcohol, and performed oral sex on him, the documents say. Then she climbed on top of him and had intercourse with him. The age of consent in California at the time was 18.'

Which part of this is he referring to as 'assault' exactly? California's ridiculous age of consent? Did she get him drunk? Did she threaten him? Is it that she grabbed his penis and put it in her mouth before he could respond? Or are famous people not allowed to have sex with anyone who has worked with them in the past or might work with them or people they know in the future? Or is it that he didn't provide explicit verbal consent or display sufficient enthusiasm?

Look, it doesn't matter if you think it's ridiculous or not, the age of consent in California is 18 (as it is in several other states as well). Legally, he couldn't consent. He also legally shouldn't have been given alcohol by a non-guardian at that age.

Beyond that, your 'point' about famous people not being able to have sex with anyone from their past is a very different instance in this case and you should know it. Flip the gender roles here. If a 27yo man met someone at the age of 7 by playing the role of her father, continued on in her life for the next 10 years as a parental figure and a mentor, and then slept with her before her legal age of consent... This is a great example of textbook predatory grooming.

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

JPK, on 21 August 2018 - 04:56 PM, said:

Azath Vitr (D, on 21 August 2018 - 04:32 PM, said:

'Bennett met Argento at age 7, when he played her son in The Heart Is Deceitful Above All Things, which she directed, starred in, and co-wrote. In the documents obtained by the Times, Bennett, who did not speak to Severson directly, says Argento became a mentor and mother figure to him.In 2013, when Bennett was 17 and Argento was 37, a family member drove him to meet Argento at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Marina Del Rey, California, according to the documents. Argento asked the family member to leave, gave Bennett alcohol, and performed oral sex on him, the documents say. Then she climbed on top of him and had intercourse with him. The age of consent in California at the time was 18.'

Which part of this is he referring to as 'assault' exactly? California's ridiculous age of consent? Did she get him drunk? Did she threaten him? Is it that she grabbed his penis and put it in her mouth before he could respond? Or are famous people not allowed to have sex with anyone who has worked with them in the past or might work with them or people they know in the future? Or is it that he didn't provide explicit verbal consent or display sufficient enthusiasm?

Look, it doesn't matter if you think it's ridiculous or not, the age of consent in California is 18 (as it is in several other states as well). Legally, he couldn't consent. He also legally shouldn't have been given alcohol by a non-guardian at that age.

Legally, homosexuality is punishable by death in many parts of the world. Do you support that because it's the law? Whether a law is just or reasonable *does* matter, especially in a democracy with a jury-based legal system. Granted, I don't live in California and I'm not on her jury; but I can communicate with people who live in California and who will serve on future juries (even if discussing this particular case in advance would disqualify them from her jury, if charges were actually brought).

Quote

Beyond that, your 'point' about famous people not being able to have sex with anyone from their past is a very different instance in this case and you should know it. Flip the gender roles here. If a 27yo man met someone at the age of 7 by playing the role of her father, continued on in her life for the next 10 years as a parental figure and a mentor, and then slept with her before her legal age of consent... This is a great example of textbook predatory grooming.

Perhaps you're an expert on predatory grooming, but a quick internet search suggests that textbook predatory grooming is a process whereby child molesters gain a child's trust and access to the child in isolation. Not whereby they 'groom' someone from childhood so they can have sex with them when they're 17.

Certainly it seems gross and inappropriate, but that doesn't mean it should be considered 'assault' and it doesn't necessarily mean it should be illegal.

This post has been edited by Azath Vitr (D'ivers: 21 August 2018 - 05:45 PM

[JPK]

You're splitting hairs here Azath. Laws designed to punish homosexuality are not comparable to laws preventing adults from sleeping with minors. If you're going to make a case based on the spirit of the law and rather it's just or not, you should actually take the spirit and propose of the laws being compared into account.

As far as the grooming argument, do you disagree that she moved herself into a clear position of influence over him at a young age?

[Macros]

As with all cases where young males are victims of security abuse by an older female there seems to be this disbelief that an attractive woman can assualt a young male. I mean, surely he's a teenager with raging hormones and will be getting high fives all round from his mates!

With any of these stories just try a simple gender reversal exercise and see how fucking terrible they sound. Like the rapist granny in WoT, simples

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

Macros, on 21 August 2018 - 08:16 PM, said:

As with all cases where young males are victims of security abuse by an older female there seems to be this disbelief that an attractive woman can assualt a young male. I mean, surely he's a teenager with raging hormones and will be getting high fives all round from his mates!

With any of these stories just try a simple gender reversal exercise and see how fucking terrible they sound. Like the rapist granny in WoT, simples

At 17? No. I wouldn't particularly care if James Franco had consensual sex with a 17 year old---and saying it's legal in New York but illegal in California is the worst sort of hair-splitting: the sort that puts people in prison. What the 'victim' described, from the details reported so far, shouldn't be considered 'assault' and shouldn't be illegal, as in fact it is not in the UK, Europe, and just about everywhere except a few parts of the United States. Unless, perhaps, if he 'froze' and was obviously not into it, or she insinuated some sort of threat to his career.

On the other hand, after her denial of having had sex with him, 'photos and messages leaked to TMZ appear to show her confessing to having sex with him. [...] "The horny kid jumped me. [...] It wasn't raped [sic] but I was frozen. He was on top of me. After, he told me I had been his sexual fantasy since was 12."'

https://www.thedaily...ssages?ref=home

That does seem like it qualifies under the 'unenthusiastic sex is rape, if you're frozen it's rape' standard of rape. Yet another case of two people raping each other?

This post has been edited by Azath Vitr (D'ivers: 22 August 2018 - 03:35 PM

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

'Ronell Avital [...] a superstar deconstructionist professor at New York University, teaching in the German and comparative-literature departments. He's a graduate student who came to NYU to be her advisee. In 2017, two years after getting his PhD, Reitman claimed that Ronell had stalked him, sexually harassed and assaulted him, and sabotaged his job search. After an 11-month Title IX investigation, the university found Ronell guilty of sexual harassment, both verbal and physical, and punished her with a one-year suspension without pay.Ronell denies everything. To me, her hundreds of histrionic e-mails read like a humorless novel of obsessive passion.

[...]
In May, some 50 prominent academics signed a pro-Ronell letter that was sent privately to NYU's president and its provost. Co-written by the renowned philosopher Judith Butler, the letter asserted that some of its signers found Reitman "malicious" and stressed Ronell's achievements and fame. It even invoked Jacques Derrida, the founder of deconstruction, who once tried to stop the sexual-harassment investigation of a colleague. That these smarties thought they could e-mail hundreds of academics about signing the letter without having it leaked tells you the kind of bubble they live in. (Butler has since expressed regret for portions of the letter.) As others have pointed out, Ronell's defenders sound a bit like the friends of Harvey Weinstein: He's made so many great movies. That's just Harvey being Harvey. Those actresses were no angels. As the novelist Chris Kraus put it recently: "Those outside this world don't seem to realize that Reitman—or any PhD student at NYU—is hardly an innocent." Really? Any PhD student?


[...]
Ronell's supporters have done their best to change the subject. It's not about sexual harassment; it's about neoliberalism (Lisa Duggan), or stamping out "all but the most technocratic pedagogy" (Kraus), or singling out queers (Jack Halberstam), or attacking a rare and original person (Slavoj Žižek). It's a violation of due process (Joan Scott), and an attack on feminism, the humanities, and the left (many, many).'

https://www.thenatio...he-ivory-tower/

[Morgoth]

It so weird how otherwise smart people can lose all vestiges of intelligence when someone they like do something terrible. Not a metoo case, but a few years ago a famous Norwegian painter (Odd Nerdrum) was prosecuted and convicted of serious tax fraud. In the millions kind of fraud. Lots of people in the art world came out and called the verdict a travesty. After all, he was a genius. A man who had put Norwegian art on the map. He was too sensitive for prison. Too gifted for prison. You do not put someone of his brilliance in a cage. And so on and so forth. It was absurd and embarrassing.

[Cause]

In my experience there is no power dynamic more unequal than that between a PhD student and his supervisor. Some people get lucky, some people get bad supervisors and some people are tortured.

I make the analogy that you are an entrepreneur you work for your self and are responsible for everything. Wierdly however you still have a boss. A boss who can tell you what to do, what to pursue, what to give up on. Even what business you should be in. However this boss isn't actually invested in the outcome. They don't suffer if what they tell you to do doesn't work out but god help you if you don't follow their advice. On a whim you might be told to do 2 weeks of work by the coming Monday. When stuff doesn't work out, because when your doing work no one has ever done before their are no guarantees, they might blame you. The thing is you can leave a toxic work place and try find a new job, keep your salary or close to it if your lucky. You cant walk away from your PhD. If you walk away you leave with nothing. So you have to try stick it out. In theory their should be things in place to help you manage your relationship with your supervisor. Chances are however your student advisor either works for your supervisor or plays golf with him on Saturdays. The university wont choose a student over a professor short of proof of physical abuse or sexual etc but they can make your life hell wwithout going to such extremes. I'm only surprised their isn't more shit in this relationships.

The lab next to mine in university had a kind of slimly prof who all the gilrs were wary of. He hit on students, went out clubbing and if he saw them at the club would approach them etc. He only ever chose the most attractive undergrads to become his postgrad students. One year is an accident, two years is a coincidence. Five years of only females and each one is a model.....

Did anything every happen? not that I know of but Id say he was definitely trying to stack the deck.

[amphibian]

My cousin got stuck with an awful advisor and abandoned his entire project four years in because it got that bad. He moved to Australia (from New York) and started a whole new project. He's much happier now.

[worry]

Spoiler

If the tweet above doesn't show up for you:
https://twitter.com/...286543517327361

[Malankazooie]

Asia Argento has initiated 'phase 2' of #MeToo. Neat.



#GTFO

[Tsundoku]

And now the circle is complete - an article about Harvey Weinstein ... and the fear the case against him may have hit a snag or two.

https://www.news.com...eebdc6910c8f9dc

[Aptorian]

Surely their case against Weinstein isn't built on one woman's testimony?

[Traveller]

Wasn't there only one out of the multitude that was recent enough to prosecute?

[Mezla PigDog]

If there ends up not being enough to prosecute it will be an indictment of the fact that sexual abuse and harassment of women in the workplace is endemic. You can tell he's guilty of very bad conduct or he wouldn't have been dropped so quickly by all of those around him. Even so that doesn't mean there's enough to prosecute and it's a sad state of affairs for women that such actions against them can go unpunished and that MeToo hasn't changed that a jot. See Kavenaugh. Well, I guess the reputational damage with Weinstein is considerable but it still isn't true "punishment". I found Germaine Greer's comments interesting that if we downgrade the crime of rape in our minds and legislation for punishment when convicted so that the perpetrators of date rape and similar crimes would face less or no time in prison that it might promote more official reports and convictions. Jury's may be more willing to convict when the sentence won't be seen as utterly ruining the perpetrators life. There are a lot of problems with that - specifically that the punishment won't match the impact on the victims but there is room for debate as to whether an increase in conviction rate would be worth it. I think not but discussion is warranted anyway, she's kinda been vilified for it and I like her. The arguments between the different waves of feminists are rather intriguing.