The Abusive Artist Doesn't Want to Be Separated from His Art

[Content Note: Rape culture; sexual assault; statutory rape.]

Yesterday, the Hollywood Reporter published a long profile of Babi Christina Engelhardt, a now 59-year-old woman who had, in her words, an affair with Woody Allen that began when she was 16 and he was 41, and lasted eight years. (The age of consent in New York is 17.) I'm not going to link directly to the piece; it's easy enough to find if you're so inclined.

Manhattan, Allen's 1979 film about a 42-year-old man (played by Allen) having an affair with a 17-year-old girl (played by Mariel Hemingway), has long been rumored to have been based on real events from Allen's life. And now we know: It was based on his relationship with Engelhardt.

On Twitter, I noted: "I hope that everyone who has insisted on making 'separate art from the artist' arguments reads this shit about how Woody Allen made a movie about the abuse he was committing in real life, and then sticks their vile apologia in a blender."

I hope that everyone who has insisted on making "separate art from the artist" arguments reads this shit about how Woody Allen made a movie about the abuse he was committing in real life, and then sticks their vile apologia in a blender. https://t.co/I3jKUFjT6s

— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) December 17, 2018

Allen is an artist who does not want to be separated from his art. To the absolute contrary, his art is about his life. Even more specifically, his art is about normalizing the abuse he perpetrates in his life, laundering his predation into romance. And he doesn't even do it by concealing or softening the abuse, but simply by telling the story with witty banter that makes it palatable to audiences who are themselves primed by the rape culture to tolerate abuse of women and girls, given the slightest opportunity to view it as something else.

And he is hardly alone: Bill Cosby told jokes about drugging women decades before he was convicted of assaulting a woman he'd drugged. Louis CK featured himself as an attempted rapist on his own show, which included his target asking him not to jerk off on her.

In instance after instance of men creating art in which they cast themselves as abusers, people who object are told that we must "separate the artist from his art."

But this is the truth about abusive men who make art about their abuse: They don't want to be separated from their art.

They want their art to serve as confession, and they want acclaim to serve as absolution.

Critics who laud, audiences who keep paying, collaborators who keep working with them, studios who keep funding them — all of us inveigled by the artist to be part of the conspiracy with the promise of more great art.

He will keep us entertained, as long as we all keep regarding it as entertainment, and nothing more.

It is a bargain far too many of us are willing to make, and remain committed to even as it becomes clear that the artist is his art; that we are not passive viewers of something neutral, but active participants in the whitewashed telling of abuse as tales of sex and love. The retelling doesn't work without someone to listen, and believe.

It doesn't work without someone to argue that we must separate the art from the artist, while refusing to do precisely that. To truly separate the abusive artist from his art is to see that both have no place in a culture where we claim that we will not abide abuse.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

We Resist: Day 364

One of the difficulties in resisting the Trump administration, the Republican Congressional majority, and Republican state legislatures (plus the occasional non-Republican who obliges us to resist their nonsense, too, like we don't have enough to worry about) is keeping on top of the sheer number of horrors, indignities, and normalization of the aggressively abnormal that they unleash every single day.

So here is a daily thread for all of us to share all the things that are going on, thus crowdsourcing a daily compendium of the onslaught of conservative erosion of our rights and our very democracy.

Stay engaged. Stay vigilant. Resist.

* * *

Here are some things in the news today:

Earlier today by me: Trump Is Making America a Pariah.

I don’t know if the government is going to shut down on Friday. But judging by the mood among Dems lately this is the likeliest it’s felt since September 2013.

— Sahil Kapur (@sahilkapur) January 18, 2018

[Content Note: Disablist language] So, we're barreling toward a government shutdown, because the Republican Party is hot garbage. At least one Democratic Senator is bluntly calling it like it is:

Quick timeline: Last year POTUS actually says “we need a good shutdown.” Then, DACA is revoked. Then, CHIP expires. Then, no deal on budget. Republicans set multiple fires that they cannot put out. We are willing to work with them , but it’s impossible when they act this crazy.

— Brian Schatz (@brianschatz) January 17, 2018

Speaking of CHIP:

BREAKING: Trump has just said he opposes CHIP as part of a CR to keep the government open.

— Andy Slavitt (@ASlavitt) January 18, 2018

Malice is the governing directive of Trump policy. And chaos is its beating heart. Alice Ollstein at TPM: Trump Blows Up Republican Plan to Blame Democrats for Blocking CHIP.

As of Wednesday, amid internal GOP divisions on a spending bill and a potential shutdown looming Friday night, House Republicans had coalesced around a strategy: Accuse Democrats planning to vote no because the plan doesn't include relief for 700,000 young immigrants of deliberately blocking the renewal of the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP).

On Thursday morning, [Donald] Trump torched that strategy with a single tweet, indicating that CHIP should not be attached to the short-term spending bill at all.

The declaration [that "CHIP should be part of a long term solution"] upends 11th-hour negotiations on Capitol Hill that were already teetering on the edge of collapse due both to Democratic opposition and internal Republican divisions.

The far-right Freedom Caucus says they have more than enough "no" votes to block the passage of a short-term deal. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) openly admitted Wednesday that he has no idea what [Donald] Trump wants or would sign when it comes to immigration. Each day, more Senate Republicans declare their intent to vote against the continuing resolution.

"It's a mess," Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) told reporters, exiting a closed-door lunch with the GOP caucus on Wednesday.

A mess deliberately created by the Republican Party. And then Trump went and rolled around in that mess with the same gusto that my dog rolls around in anything stinky.

Anyway, this continues to be evergreen.

Fuck every single person who said or implied there was no difference between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.

— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) August 15, 2017

* * *

Everything is fine. (Everything is not fine.)

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson says Americans should be "sober" about possibility of conflict with North Korea https://t.co/VFpUFfhkr9 pic.twitter.com/XXrLWN1EN7

— CBS News (@CBSNews) January 17, 2018

WARNING: This is a serious intelligence indicator. Obviously Mattis/Tillerson have orders to plan & prepare to strike North Korea. A “Bloody nose” attack would lead to total nuclear, bio & chemical war in Korea. It’s Insane. https://t.co/mUVTJlODH8

— Malcolm Nance (@MalcolmNance) January 18, 2018

We are being governed by people who refuse to give healthcare to children and are actively hunting for a devastating global war. What the entire fuck. Sob.

* * *

Danica Coto at the AP: U.S. Withholds Hurricane Emergency Loan Sought by Puerto Rico. "A billion-dollar emergency loan approved by Congress to help Puerto Rico deal with the effects of Hurricane Maria has been temporarily withheld by federal officials who say the U.S. territory is not facing a cash shortage like it has repeatedly warned about in recent months. ...Federal officials said the U.S. government will create a cash balance policy to determine when the funds will be released via the Community Disaster Loan Program. They said in the letter that the cash balance level will be decided on by the federal government in consultation with Puerto Rico officials and a federal control board overseeing the island's finances. Once the central cash balance decreases to that level, the funds will be released, officials said." Unfuckingreal.

Matt Shuham at TPM: Acting CFPB Director Mulvaney Requests No Quarterly Funding. "Mick Mulvaney, the Trump-appointed acting director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, asked for zero dollars in his quarterly budget request Wednesday. In a letter obtained by TPM, Mulvaney told Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen that '[s]imply put, I have been assured that the funds currently in the Bureau Fund are sufficient' to last the quarter. ...The move is unprecedented: The consumer watchdog agency has reliably asked the Fed for tens of millions of dollars quarterly to cover its operating expenses. The requests have topped $200 million four times, and have never been rejected."

Ed O'Keefe at the Washington Post: Trump Pushes Back on Chief of Staff Claims That Border Wall Pledges 'Uninformed'.

White House Chief of Staff John F. Kelly told Democratic lawmakers Wednesday that some of the hard-line immigration policies [Donald] Trump advocated during the campaign were "uninformed," that the United States will never construct a wall along its entire southern border, and that Mexico will never pay for it, according to people familiar with the meeting.

The comments were out of sync with remarks by Trump, who in recent days has reiterated his desire to build a border wall that would be funded by Mexico "indirectly through NAFTA."

Trump amplified this stance Thursday in back-to-back tweets that called the North American Free Trade Agreement "a bad joke" and asserted that reworked trade deals with Mexico would somehow pay for the wall "directly or indirectly."

"The Wall is the Wall, it has never changed or evolved from the first day I conceived of it. Parts will be, of necessity, see through and it was never intended to be built in areas where there is natural protection such as mountains, wastelands or tough rivers or water," Trump wrote.

"The Wall will be paid for, directly or indirectly, or through longer term reimbursement, by Mexico, which has a ridiculous $71 billion dollar trade surplus with the U.S.," Trump continued. "The $20 billion dollar Wall is 'peanuts' compared to what Mexico makes from the U.S. NAFTA is a bad joke!"

The mixed signals underscore the difficulty congressional Republicans have faced as they have tried to decipher what the president wants in an immigration deal.

"Mixed signals." That's an unnecessarily polite way of saying the President of the United States is completely incoherent and has no fucking idea what he is talking about on any policy, ever.

Also, he is a liar. As usual. E.A. Crunden at ThinkProgress: Trump Claims His Stance on the Border Wall Hasn't Changed; His Own Record Proves That's Not True. "The president has often promised a 'big, beautiful wall,' but the specifics of that project have never been entirely clear. The wall, which poses a number of environmental, logistical, and financial obstacles, is all but impossible to build in the style Trump wants. The president has also seemed to shift his stance dramatically at times, saying that the wall is more of a symbolic gesture, rather than a literal proposal."

Peter Stone and Greg Gordon at McClatchy: FBI Investigating Whether Russian Money Went to NRA to Help Trump. "The FBI is investigating whether a top Russian banker with ties to the Kremlin illegally funneled money to the National Rifle Association to help Donald Trump win the presidency, two sources familiar with the matter have told McClatchy. FBI counterintelligence investigators have focused on the activities of Alexander Torshin, the deputy governor of Russia's central bank who is known for his close relationships with both Russian President Vladimir Putin and the NRA, the sources said. It is illegal to use foreign money to influence federal elections."

This is, of course, not the first time the NRA has been suspected of having worked with the Kremlin to influence the election.

Betsy Woodruff at the Daily Beast: House Intel Will Release Fusion GPS Interview Transcript. "The House Intelligence Committee will release the transcript of its interview with Glenn Simpson, the head of controversial research firm Fusion GPS, The Daily Beast has learned. The transcript could be released as soon as today. Adam Schiff, the committee's top Democrat, has called for the release of the transcript. Fusion GPS's co-founder has also called for its release." Good.

* * *

[CN: Sexual assault; descriptions of sexual violence; rape apologia. Covers entire section.]

Rebecca Ratcliffe at the Guardian: Sexual Harassment and Assault Rife at United Nations, Staff Claim. "The United Nations has allowed sexual harassment and assault to flourish in its offices around the world, with accusers ignored and perpetrators free to act with impunity, the Guardian has been told. Dozens of current and former UN employees described a culture of silence across the organisation and a flawed grievance system that is stacked against victims. Of the employees interviewed, 15 said they had experienced or reported sexual harassment or assault within the past five years. The alleged offences ranged from verbal harassment to rape. Seven of the women had formally reported what happened, a route that campaigners say is rarely pursued by victims for fear of losing their job, or in the belief that no action will be taken."

Kim Kozlowski at the Detroit News: What MSU Knew: 14 Were Warned of Nassar Abuse. "Reports of sexual misconduct by Dr. Larry Nassar reached at least 14 Michigan State University representatives in the two decades before his arrest, with no fewer than eight women reporting his actions, a Detroit News investigation has found. Among those notified was MSU President Lou Anna Simon, who was informed in 2014 that a Title IX complaint and a police report had been filed against an unnamed physician, she told The News on Wednesday. ...Among the others who were aware of alleged abuse were athletic trainers, assistant coaches, a university police detective, and an official who is now MSU's assistant general counsel, according to university records and accounts of victims who spoke to The News. Collectively, the accounts show MSU missed multiple opportunities over two decades to stop Nassar, a graduate of its osteopathic medical school who became a renowned doctor but went on to molest scores of girls and women under the guise of treating them for pain."

Olivia Messer at the Daily Beast: Sex-Abuse Doc Larry Nassar Complains His Victims' Impact Statements Are Too Harsh. "Former USA Gymnastics doctor Larry Nassar, who pleaded guilty to multiple charges of sexual assault, complained Thursday that he cannot stand the stress of listening to dozens of young women cry and scream at him for what he did. 'I didn't orchestrate this. You did,' Circuit Court Judge Rosemarie Aquilina sternly replied to Nassar... 'You may find it harsh that you're here listening, but nothing is as harsh as what victims endured in your hands,' she added." Fuckkkkkkkkk that guy.

[CN: Video may autoplay at link] Dylan Farrow Details Her Sexual Assault Allegations Against Woody Allen. That is the full transcript to the video embedded in the tweet below.

The urgency and courage of @realdylanfarrow in this interview is something. I believe her now, and I have believed her always. https://t.co/Oj4X85vQyl

— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) January 18, 2018

You know what else is something? That clip of Woody Allen, in which he says that if he'd wanted to be a child molester, he'd had plenty of opportunities. That is not something a decent person would say.

— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) January 18, 2018

It does, however, sound like something a person who had recently begun "an affair" with his own stepdaughter would say, though.

— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) January 18, 2018

Kaiser at Celebitchy: James Franco Will Attend Sunday's SAGs; He's 'Reaching out to Former Girlfriends,' Too. "[H]e's trying to make calls behind-the-scenes to make sure that no one is going to expose him even further. 'James Franco is digging into his past in the wake of allegations of sexually inappropriate behavior. 'James has been reaching out to former girlfriends for the past month asking about his behavior,' a source tells PEOPLE. 'He's known this was coming and was trying to get ahead of the story.'' ...I wonder how those calls will go. 'Look, if People Magazine or The Hollywood Reporter calls you, what will you say? Oh, I don't remember it that way. Hey, can I buy you a new car?' That's exactly what's happening." Probably. And no matter what the exact content of those calls, it's gross he's even making them. Yikes.

What have you been reading that we need to resist today?

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

We Resist: Day 357

One of the difficulties in resisting the Trump administration, the Republican Congressional majority, and Republican state legislatures (plus the occasional non-Republican who obliges us to resist their nonsense, too, like we don't have enough to worry about) is keeping on top of the sheer number of horrors, indignities, and normalization of the aggressively abnormal that they unleash every single day.

So here is a daily thread for all of us to share all the things that are going on, thus crowdsourcing a daily compendium of the onslaught of conservative erosion of our rights and our very democracy.

Stay engaged. Stay vigilant. Resist.

* * *

Here are some things in the news today:

Earlier today by me: "None of this was what I thought was going to happen." and Malice Is Trump's Governing Principle: Medicaid Edition and Here's a Real Thing That Just Happened.

Charlie Savage, Eileen Sullivan, and Nicholas Fandos at the New York Times: House Votes to Renew Surveillance Law, Rejecting New Privacy Limits.

A yearslong effort by a bipartisan group of lawmakers to impose significant new privacy limits on the National Security Agency's warrantless surveillance program fell short on Thursday, as the House of Representatives voted to extend the legal basis for that program by six years with only minimal changes.

The vote, 256 to 164, centered on an expiring law, Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act, which permits the government to collect without a warrant from American firms, like Google and AT&T, the emails and other communications of foreigners abroad — even when they are talking to Americans.

Before approving the extension of the law, the House voted 233 to 183 to reject an amendment that proposed a series of overhauls. Among them was a requirement that officials get warrants in most cases before hunting for and reading emails and other messages of Americans swept up under the program.

The legislation still has to go through the Senate. But fewer lawmakers there appear to favor major changes to spying laws, so the House vote is likely the effective end of a debate over 21st-century surveillance technology and privacy rights.

"Warrantless wiretapping" was a massive concern during the Bush administration; I can't even imagine how many posts I wrote about FISA during the Bush years. FISA is one of the central reasons that I get extremely annoyed when I see nostalgia for George W. Bush's presidency, and one of the primary examples of how his presidency laid the groundwork for Donald Trump's.

Naturally, this bill didn't pass without a hefty dose of Trump fuckery:

“House votes on controversial FISA ACT today.” This is the act that may have been used, with the help of the discredited and phony Dossier, to so badly surveil and abuse the Trump Campaign by the previous administration and others?

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 11, 2018

Two things: 1. As Illinois Attorney General candidate Renato Mariotti‏ pointed out, "when judges sign FISA warrants to authorize surveillance, they make a finding that the target of the surveillance was acting on behalf of a foreign power." Whooooooops!

2. Trump subsequently posted a contradictory tweet reading: "With that being said, I have personally directed the fix to the unmasking process since taking office and today's vote is about foreign surveillance of foreign bad guys on foreign land. We need it! Get smart!"

So now we get headlines like this one at Axios: Trump Stuns Republican Leaders with Tweeted Policy Backflips.

Honest to Maude, if Republican leaders still have the capacity to be "stunned" by evidence that Trump has no fucking idea what he is talking about when it comes to any policy ever, they are even stupider than I thought, which I didn't even believe was possible.

* * *

[Content Note: Disablism] Lena H. Sun and Juliet Eilperin at the Washington Post: Trump Administration Freezes Database of Addiction and Mental Health Programs.

Federal health officials have suspended a program that helps thousands of professionals and community groups across the country find effective interventions for preventing and treating mental illness and substance use disorders.

The National Registry of Evidence-based Programs and Practices is housed within the Health and Human Services Department's Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

The registry, which was launched in 1997, offers a database of hundreds of mental health and substance abuse programs that have been assessed by an independent contractor and deemed scientifically sound. Getting a program or therapeutic approach included in this registry amounts to receiving federal recognition as an evidence-based practice. Mental health and addiction specialists say they rely on this database as a key source for finding appropriate and effective therapies.

...Administration officials confirmed that the contract for running the database has been terminated. A new entity will take over the program's duties. A director for that new group was announced Monday, but no other staff is in place. Agency spokesman Brian Dominguez said Wednesday the new entity is "working closely" with other parts of the agency to "institute an even more scientifically rigorous approach to better inform the identification and implementation of evidence-based programs and practices."

Officials declined to say why the registry was suspended, nor did they give specifics about how the new approach will work, when it will launch or whether existing validated programs will be included.

This is terribly concerning, especially since administration officials refuse to provide a rationale for suspending the registry. Fucking hell.

[CN: Racism]

Trump administration changing rules to make it easier for banks to REDLINE communities of color. https://t.co/goI3uj6IXl

— Samuel Sinyangwe (@samswey) January 11, 2018

In resistance to the onslaught of Trump administration cruelty masquerading as policy, California and New York, among other states, are pushing back in interesting ways:

Sam Levin at the Guardian: California in Revolt: How the Progressive State Plans to Foil the Trump Agenda.

Bill McKibben at the Guardian: New York City Just Declared War on the Oil Industry.

I feel this state-level pushback is critically important — and yet, at the same time, it scares me, because it's vanishingly unlikely to convince Trump to back off. Instead, he will escalate, which in turn will strain the boundaries of the republic to a breaking point.

We are legitimately concerned about Trump starting a nuclear war; I think we should be equally concerned about his starting a civil war.

* * *

[CN: Sexual abuse; revenge porn] Melanie Schmitz at ThinkProgress: Missouri Governor Allegedly Took Nude Photo of Woman, Threatened to Release It If She Exposed Affair. "A report by News 4 KMOV this week detailed shocking allegations against Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens (R), who is accused by one woman of threatening to release her nude photos if she ever went public with their affair."

As Sarah Felts observed on Twitter: "Greitens didn't deny the allegation that he led a woman into his basement, tied her up, blindfolded her, & then took a naked photo of her to use as blackmail. That's the lede. Not the affair." Absolutely right.

[CN: Sexual harassment and assault] Daniel Miller and Amy Kaufman at the LA Times: Five Women Accuse Actor James Franco of Inappropriate or Sexually Exploitative Behavior. "Tither-Kaplan is one of five women who, in interviews with The Times, accused Franco, 39, of behavior they found to be inappropriate or sexually exploitative. Four were his students, and another said he was her mentor. In some cases, they said they believed Franco could offer them career advancement, and acquiesced to his wishes even when they were uncomfortable. 'I feel there was an abuse of power, and there was a culture of exploiting non-celebrity women, and a culture of women being replaceable,' said Tither-Kaplan, who was one of many women who took to Twitter on Sunday night to vent anger over Franco's win." Fuck James Franco. Seethe.

[CN: Sexual abuse] Mira Sorvino at the Huffington Post: An Open Letter to Dylan Farrow. "I am writing to express my belief in and support of you. ...I am so sorry, Dylan! I cannot begin to imagine how you have felt, all these years as you watched someone you called out as having hurt you as a child, a vulnerable little girl in his care, be lauded again and again, including by me and countless others in Hollywood who praised him and ignored you. ...We are in a day and age when everything must be re-examined. This kind of abuse cannot be allowed to continue. If this means tearing down all the old gods, so be it. The cognitive dissonance, the denial and cowardice that spare us painful truths and prevent us from acting in defense of innocent victims while allowing 'beloved' individuals to continue their heinous behavior must be jettisoned from the bottom of our souls." Sob.

What have you been reading that we need to resist today?

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Quote of the Day

[Content Note: Sexual assault; objectification; misogyny.]

"He is dressing up crime as art."—Richard Morgan, in a terrific piece about Woody Allen for the Washington Post.

Morgan did something that, according to the staff in the rare-books wing at Princeton University's Firestone Library, he is the first person to do: Read all of Allen's "drafts and scribblings, his psychological and physical cutting-room floor that exists in the 56-box, 57-year personal archives he has been curating" there since 1980.

Of this endeavor, Morgan writes: "I'm the first person to read Allen's collection — the Woody Papers — from cover to cover, and from the very beginning to the very end, Allen, quite simply, drips with repetitious misogyny."

Contrary to what you might reasonably expect, he doesn't approach this subject as though he's the first one to the punch, in the way many men approach subjects like this one. Instead, Morgan made an effort to do something that no other commentator has done, by reading all of Allen's papers, and what he writes here then backs up what (mostly) women, including his victims, have been saying about Allen for a very long time.

I like Morgan's tone here. I appreciate it. There is something nice (for lack of a better word) to me about his clearly being disgusted by all the decades of misogyny he encountered.

It's terribly rare to read a man write on this subject with such obvious contempt.

Morgan, who is himself a survivor of parental abuse and sexual assault, is certainly aware that he will be taken seriously and heard in a way that women have not been on the subject of Woody Allen's abuse. Given that frustrating reality, I am relieved he's not leaving any room for mistaking his position as anything other than one of absolute condemnation.

He is dressing up crime as art.

Yes. He is. And minimizing his crimes by turning them into art, which is cynically defended by seeing him only as the artist and never the criminal.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

"My allegation is apparently still just too complicated."

[Content Note: Descriptions of sexual assault, gaslighting, and rape apologia.]

This is just a heartbreaking, enraging, brave, and important piece by Dylan Farrow: "Why has the #MeToo revolution spared Woody Allen?"

I'm not even going to excerpt it. Just go read the entire thing. Every word.

I have always believed Dylan Farrow. I do still. And I take up space in solidarity with her. Today and forever.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

In the News

Here is some stuff in the news today...

[Content Note: Terrorism; death; video may autoplay at link] Fucking hell: "Three separate car bombings in the Iraqi capital Wednesday killed at least 93 people and wounded at least 165. The Islamic State group later claimed responsibility for all three bombings. In recent months, the extremist faction has lost some of the Iraqi territory it conquered in a stunning 2014 blitz. But Wednesday's carnage demonstrates the group's lingering ability to launch significant attacks across the country and in the heart of the capital. In the largest attack of the day, a car bomb ripped through a commercial area in the predominantly Shiite neighborhood of Sadr City Wednesday morning, killing at least 63 people and wounding at least 85. Later in the afternoon, two more car bombs killed at least 30 and wounded 80, police officials said. One bomber targeted a police station in Baghdad's northwest Kadhimiyah neighborhood, killing 18, of whom five were policemen, and wounding 34. Another bombing In the northern Baghdad neighborhood of Jamiya killed 12 and wounded 46." I am so angry and so sad about the continued havoc and fear and injury and death that IS is wreaking in Iraq (and elsewhere). Fuck these people. My thoughts and sympathies and support are with the people of Iraq who are being targeted by this incomprehensibly cruel group.

[CN: Police brutality; white supremacy] Delrish Moss has been sworn in as Ferguson, Missouri's new chief of police. Moss "is the first Black person to run the department. Moss, 51, takes over the department as it works to implement the terms of its agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), which requires a major overhaul of practices that were found to violate the civil rights of the city's Black residents." Good luck to him. I mean that with all seriousness and hopefulness.

Vice-President Joe Biden says if he'd decided to run for president, he would have been aces! "It's an awful thing to say, but I think I would have been the best president." Yep, that's an awful thing to say!

[CN: Fat hatred] "Obesity may not cut your life short after all, a new study suggests." No shit! Gotta love the entire tenor of this article: Look, science, may be proving that fat doesn't actually kill you, but let's not get ahead of ourselves! Your life will probably be terrible! And also maybe science is wrong! In any case, let's not get ahead of ourselves with any kind of wild notions that we should stop hating fat people and bullying them constantly under the auspices of concern for their health.

[CN: Racism; displacement] Wow: "The remains of at least 10 Native American children who died nearly 2,000 miles away from their homes while being forced to attend a government-run boarding school in Pennsylvania more than a century ago could soon be repatriated under an effort taken up by a South Dakota tribe. The exhumation and return of the bodies of the children who as students of the Carlisle Indian Industrial School were stripped of their culture and left vulnerable to abuse won't be an easy undertaking. But leaders of the Rosebud Sioux Tribe hope that a meeting with representatives from the U.S. Army and other tribes scheduled for Tuesday will begin the negotiation process to repatriate the remains of the 10 children, and eventually, of the dozens more who died while attending the school as part of an assimilation policy intended to rid the children from Native American traditions and replace them with European culture. 'We are hoping that the United States government will say 'Yes, let's bring your relatives home,'' said Russell Eagle Bear, the historic preservation officer for the Rosebud Sioux Tribe."

[CN: Rape culture; familial sexual abuse] Ronan Farrow, the son of Woody Allen, has written a piece for The Hollywood Reporter about, essentially, the fact that the media and lots of famous people continue to ignore his sister's allegations of sexual abuse against their father. And I have a lot of thoughts about what he wrote, none of which I feel like detailing today, but I will point out this one incredible, painful irony: "But it hurts my sister every time one of her heroes like Louis C.K., or a star her age, like Miley Cyrus, works with Woody Allen." Louis CK, of course, has been accused of sexually harassing and/or assaulting multiple female comics. But no charges have been brought, so everyone feels free to ignore them. Like, yanno, Woody Allen. It's entirely possible (and likely) that Dylan and Ronan Farrow are among the many people who have simply never even heard of these charges.

[CN: Transphobia; typical bad media language and misgendering] "Portage transgender teen places second in prom queen contest." This is where I attended high school. There are problems with the article, but I'm really glad that Dakota Yorke was given a chance to speak for herself and I was pleased to see how many of her classmates are publicly supporting her. As well as the school! Good job, PHS.

[CN: Misogyny] OMFG this article about the Ghostbusters reboot. The subhead ALONE! "It's hard to believe geek culture 'sexism' is responsible for all the bad buzz aimed at Paul Feig's female-fronted remake. Now we need Bill Murray to save the day." Of course we do. Love how sexism is in scare-quotes, btw.

[CN: Video may autoplay at link] This tickles me endlessly: "Known for her grasp of policy, Mrs. Clinton has spoken at length in her presidential campaign on topics as diverse as Alzheimer's research and military tensions in the South China Sea. But it is her unusual knowledge about extraterrestrials that has struck a small but committed cohort of voters. Mrs. Clinton has vowed that barring any threats to national security, she would open up government files on the subject, a shift from President Obama, who typically dismisses the topic as a joke. Her position has elated U.F.O. enthusiasts, who have declared Mrs. Clinton the first 'E.T. candidate.'"

[CN: Video may autoplay at link] "Move over bald eagles, the bison are coming for you. While the bald eagle may be the national bird of the U.S., President Obama today officially made the bison the official mammal of the United States by signing the National Bison Legacy Act into law. It is the first time the U.S. has designated a national mammal." Congratulations, bison!

And finally! It's generally not a great idea to surprise someone by getting them a pet, lol, but this story is absolutely terrific: "A teacher in Texas was understandably distraught when her beloved 16-year-old cat named Blondie died. But Tonya Andrews' tears of sadness turned to those of joy when her caring students at Joshua High School, in Joshua, surprised her soon after with an extraordinarily thoughtful gift: two adorable kittens. ...Initially, the teacher thought they belonged to Hanhart and that the class was just going to play with them. 'Then she held them out to me and said they were mine. My heart was filled with joy,' she added, saying she'd 'never forget our sweet, sweet Blondie,' who they'd rescued from a warehouse in Fort Worth. 'But my heart can now experience happiness again.'" Blub!

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

In the News

Here is some stuff in the news today...

[Content Note: Assault] Donald Trump's campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, who was accused of forcefully grabbing Breitbart reporter Michelle Fields, and vehemently denied it, has been charged with misdemeanor battery. In footage of the incident, Lewandowski can be seen grabbing Fields, contrary to his claims otherwise. Wesley Lowery has the text of the arrest report. Nice campaign you've got there, Trump.

[CN: Islamophobia] "Harsh rhetoric about Muslims by Republican candidates in the U.S. presidential election campaign is undermining national security efforts, U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said on Tuesday. Asked about comments by Republicans Donald Trump and Ted Cruz, Johnson told MSNBC in an interview that singling out a specific community hampers government efforts to build the connections that are needed to thwart possible attacks. 'Inflammatory comments about patrolling and securing Muslim neighbors or barring Muslims from entering this country, having an immigration policy based on religion, is counterproductive to our homeland security and national security interests,' he said." The Republican candidates are a national security threat for the entire country, and a domestic security threat for Muslim Americans.

[CN: Hijacking] "The hijack of a domestic Egyptian flight that caused it to be diverted to Cyprus has ended with all hostages released and the hijacker surrendering. EgyptAir Flight MS181 was taken over by a passenger claiming to be wearing a suicide explosive belt. Airline officials later said they had been told by Cypriot authorities that the belt was fake. The hijacker's motives remain unclear but the Cypriot president said the incident was not terrorism-related. No-one was injured in the hijacking, Cypriot government spokesman Nikos Christodulides tweeted." What a truly strange story! I'm glad no one was injured.

[CN: Guns] Devastating: "A Chicago teen who appeared in an award-winning public service video about gun violence was shot and seriously injured over the weekend, the New York Times reports. Zarriel Trotter, 13, was struck by a stray bullet after two groups of youths got into a 'heated argument' Friday night on the city's West Side, authorities said. A person pulled out a gun and started firing, striking the boy. 'He was not the intended target,' Police Officer Jose Estrada said, according to the Times. 'He was standing on the sidewalk.' No one else was injured in the shooting. Zarriel, as the Times notes, was one of several young students who took part in a video series last year highlighting the impact gun violence has had on the black community. In the videos, which were part of the YouTube and Facebook campaign, Black Is Human, showed several youth speaking about their fear of gun violence and becoming part of the statistics, as well as the damage it was doing to their neighborhoods. 'I don't want to live around my community where I got to keep on hearing and hearing people keep on getting shot, people keep on getting killed,' Zarriel said in the video in which he is featured."

[CN: Homophobia; transphobia] GOOD: "North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper announced on Tuesday that he will not defend HB 2, the state's newly passed anti-LGBT law that bans all local LGBT rights ordinances. Cooper said in a statement that he and his office won't 'defend the constitutionality of the discrimination' in the bill which Governor Pat McCrory signed last week. ...Cooper, a Democrat, is running for governor and challenging incumbent McCrory in the fall."

[CN: Addiction] President Obama will unveil a new $1.1 billion proposal to combat heroin and opioid addiction, and it looks a lot different than the usual war on drugs. "During the summit, Obama will outline a multi-point plan, which will include, according to a White House fact sheet: Expanding access to treatment, establishing a mental health and substance-use disorder parity task force, investing in community policing to address heroin, implementing syringe-services programs." I'm not keen on the policing part, but it's only $7 million in Justice Department funding, out of the entire billion+ budget. So that's a big shift.

[CN: Racism; guns; militarized police] Jamil Smith expresses concerns for his hometown Cleveland, once the Republican convention arrives in town and what it will leave in its wake.

Perfect headline is perfect: "Trump Struggles With Presidential Demeanor Ahead of Wisconsin Primary."

If you've been waiting with baited breath to see who Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker endorsed, your long national nightmare is over: He has endorsed Ted Cruz.

[CN: Rape culture] Here are a few more stars you can add to your "These Fuckers Are Still Willing to Work with Woody Allen" list: Kristen Stewart, Jesse Eisenberg, Steve Carell, Blake Lively, and Parker Posey, all of whom star in his new film Café Society, which will open this year's Cannes Film Festival, because of course it will.

Neat! "The discovery of a fossilized skull in Kazakhstan is making paleontologists rewrite the timeline of the Siberian unicorn, Elasmotherium sibiricum. This impressive animal was a real-life unicorn, though it didn't match the image most of us have for the fairytale creature. Closer to a rhino than a horse in appearance, it was similar in stature to the mammoth. Measuring up to 6.5 feet tall and almost 15 feet long, it weighed up to 9,000 pounds. Its most recognizable feature was its single horn, which is thought to have been much longer than a rhino's, up to multiple feet long. Its habitat was the vast territory from the Don River in Russia to east of modern Kazakhstan. ...The Siberian unicorn, which first emerged in the fossil record around 2.5 million years ago, was thought to have disappeared 350,000 years ago. But the discovery made by researchers from Tomsk State University in Siberia, Russia, seems to show that E. sibiricum might have stuck around much longer. In fact, the beast and humans might have met."

Speaking of unicorns: "They are distinctive for the long tusk that protrudes from their head but until now nobody had a clue why the Narwhal evolved like it did. Thanks to a scientific breakthrough, biologists now believe that the horn of the male of the species is in fact a sensory organ. ...The tusk is actually the left canine of the toothed whale which breaks through its upper lip. But unlike a normal tooth it has no enamel, making it porous and meaning sea water can travel through the tusk connecting with nerve endings and then, most importantly, sending signals to the brain."

And finally! Bonnie Baby Bentangs! The Edinburgh Zoo "is hopeful that the two Banteng calves will contribute to the conservation of this endangered species in the future."

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

In the News

Here is some stuff in the news today...

[Content Note: Police brutality; racism; death] Raymond Tensing, the former University of Cincinnati police officer who has been charged with murder for shooting and killing Sam Dubose during a traffic stop, pleaded not guilty this morning—and his attorney says "he was shocked by the charge, saying the former officer 'feared for his life.'" Yeah, well, you know what I think about that.

[CN: Rape culture; sexual violence] Blah blah rape accusations ruin men's lives blah blah fart: A year after Dylan Farrow publicly disclosed surviving sexual abuse perpetrated by her then-father Woody Allen, NPR runs a glowing interview with Allen which includes Allen saying that his marriage to his ex-wife's daughter Soon-Yi Previn worked because "I was paternal. She responded to someone paternal. I liked her youth and energy. She deferred to me, and I was happy to give her an enormous amount of decision-making just as a gift and let her take charge of so many things." This man is a fucking abuser and a fucking rapist.

After Secretary of Defense Ash Carter announced earlier this month that the US military would "create a working group to study over the next six months the policy and readiness implications of welcoming transgender persons to serve openly," that six-month process will begin next Monday. Earlier this week, "Carter sent a memo to top military brass and civilians formally outlining his plan that would protect transgender troops from being discharged and directs officials to develop a plan within six months to incorporate those troops into the ranks."

[CN: Plane crash] Wreckage found "on the French island of Réunion in the Indian ocean is very likely to be wreckage from a Boeing 777," and the serial number appears to match that of Flight MH370, which disappeared 17 months ago. The discovered aircraft wing section will be shipped to France for verification.

[CN: War on agency] Again, a fetus is more important than the person carrying it: "Alabama officials are currently seeking to prevent a pregnant prison inmate from obtaining a legal abortion by stripping her of her parental rights, in a case where a lawyer has been appointed to represent the interests of her fetus. An unnamed woman, who is referred to in court documents only as Jane Doe, is asking for permission to travel to Huntsville to end her pregnancy. She says she was unable to get an abortion before she was taken into custody and is now feeling desperate. 'I am very distraught, and do not want to be forced to carry this pregnancy to term,' she wrote. Jane Doe—who has to get permission from the court to be transported to the nearest clinic because prison officials consider abortion to be a non-emergency procedure—is being represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, which argues that it would be 'cruel and unusual punishment' for the state of Alabama to deny her constitutional right to abortion." Yes, yes it would be.

President Obama keeps the executive orders rolling: "President Obama has signed an executive order calling for the US to build the world's fastest computer by 2025. The supercomputer would be 20 times quicker than the current leading machine, which is in China. It would be capable of making one quintillion (a billion billion) calculations per second—a figure which is known as one exaflop. A body called the National Strategic Computing Initiative (NSCI) will be set up to research and build the computer." Cool!

Melissa McCarthy has finally launched her long-awaited fashion label, Melissa McCarthy Seven7, and it looks amaaaaaaazing! The line will range from sizes four to 28.

[CN: Video autoplays at link] Last night, Late Night with Seth Meyers featured a performance by the Broadway cast of Fun Home, the musical based on Alison Bechdel's graphic memoir of the same name. The scene depicted is middle-aged Bechdel recalling her first sexual experience at college, when she realized she's a lesbian.

[CN: Video autoplays at second link] And finally! Battle of the adorbzlarious: French Bulldog Puppy playing with a doorstop vs. Unsuspecting Cat surprised by cucumber. I think it's a draw!

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

My Point, Here It Is

[Content Note: Rape culture; rape apologia; racism.]

Yesterday, I wrote a piece about a planned biopic of Mike Tyson and tolerance for some rapists, as long as they're popular blokes, in which I noted: "Woody Allen has stars lining up to be in his pictures."

Allen, whose daughter Dylan Farrow has detailed being sexually assaulted by him, also gets glowing profiles written about him in magazines like the New York Observer that open with revolting paragraphs like this one:

Would it kill you to know that Woody Allen is just like us? He's got two teenage girls who listen to pop music on their iPhones. He's always worried that something bad will happen to them. He exercises every morning but struggles to keep his weight up. (Okay. He's not totally like us.)

The two teenage daughters being referenced there, we are informed seven paragraphs later, are "Bechet, who’s 15, and Manzie, 14."

They're adopted. Each is named for a famous jazz musician. When I met them this past spring at the opening of Mr. Allens's Bullets Over Broadway premiere, they were incredibly normal teenage girls. Does he like having two teenage girls in the house? "No! They're a lot of work. When they hit the teenage years they become more difficult. They're great before then, charming. But they hit the teenage years and they become like Bonnie Parker."

That's a reference to Bonnie and Clyde. Woody Allen is making the joke that his teenage daughters are like a dangerous criminal. Ha ha, he's just like us, being terrorized in his own home by teenage girls.

To recall: Dylan Farrow says Woody Allen sexually abused her in their own home.

Dylan Farrow's allegations are never mentioned anywhere in the piece, and the author, Roger Friedman, is almost belligerent in his avoidance. Toward the end of the piece, he writes:

Earlier this year, in an effort to derail Ms. Blanchett's Oscar campaign, a couple of anonymous complaints turned up in the tabloids about Mr. Allen not using black actors. He's horrified when I bring up the subject.

Note that the complaints were not valid criticisms of an American filmmaker known for making overwhelmingly white movies in one of the country's most ethnically diverse cities, but merely just cynical attempts "to derail [Cate] Blanchett's Oscar campaign."

The piece goes on to allow Allen to make his usual bullshit excuse for not telling stories that include people of color.*

Dylan Farrow's piece was published in the New York Times around the same time. To invoke the criticism about Allen's lily white casting while failing to give even oblique reference to Farrow's account of abuse, especially as Blanchett was named in Farrow's piece as someone who has worked with Allen without regard for what he did to Dylan, reads as a way of saying to those who believe Dylan Farrow: Fuck you. Her account is so incredulous that I wouldn't even credit it with a mention.

And reads as saying the same to Dylan Farrow herself, which is remarkably cruel and sinister, in a piece lionizing her abuser.

Naturally, Allen may have made not mentioning the allegations a requirement of his participation. In which case, agreeing to that while writing glowingly of his relationship with his (other) daughters and reporting how "horrified" he is to be asked to confront criticisms regarding race, as if everything's on the table, is deeply mendacious.

How about his own vulnerability? "I worry not only about me. But that something bad won't happen to three other people. That my wife won't get run over, that my kids won't die in a plane crash. I used to worry about just me and maybe one other person!"

By way of reminder, Allen has other children from his previous relationship with Mia Farrow, at least one of whom, his son Moses, continues to publicly defend him. At he doesn't even make the list of people about whom Allen worries.

Neat guy. "American Master."

--------------------

* Allen says he will not cast black actors "unless I write a story that requires it. You don't hire people based on race. You hire people based on who is correct for the part. The implication is that I'm deliberately not hiring black actors, which is stupid. I cast only what's right for the part. Race, friendship means nothing to me except who is right for the part." Note the circular logic: He writes stories that don't include parts that are "correct" for black actors, but it's stupid to imply he's deliberately not hiring black actors, even though he only casts "what's right for the part"—parts that he writes.

That is immediately followed by what essentially boils down to the old "I have black friends" chestnut: Chris Rock appeared in a documentary about him, and bought him a wedding present, and went to dinner with him once. "I'm friendly with Spike Lee. We don't socialize, but I don't socialize with anyone. I don't have white friends either."

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

In the News

Here is some stuff in the news today...

There was an earthquake in the Los Angeles area this morning of a 4.4 magnitude followed by at least six aftershocks. Thankfully, there are no reports of injuries or serious damage.

[Content Note: Violence; guns] Joseph Andrew Felton, Jr. is now in custody after a nearly nine-hour standoff with Chicago police yesterday. Felton is suspected of having killed his wife.

The Crimean parliament voted this morning to declare independence from Ukraine, "a first step toward the goal backed by 96% of voters during a weekend referendum: becoming part of Russia." This is the beginning of...something.

[CN: Death; homophobia; war on agency] The founder of the Westboro Baptist Church, Fred Phelps, is reportedly on the verge of death. Westboro, of course, is the outfit known for picketing the funerals of soldiers and picketing or harassing queer activists and abortionists. They are a harmful, contemptible lot, and, because I don't subscribe to the Fred Phelps Doctrine of Reprehensible Fuckery, I will not celebrate that he is dying. Instead I will wish on him the enlightenment of compassion, in the hope he will apologize to the people he has harmed with his last breaths. It's never too late for decency as long as you're not yet dead, Fred.

[CN: Violence; guns] A witness at the murder trial of Oscar Pistorius testified that Pistorius once went into "combat mode" and searched his house with a gun because he was startled by the sound of a washing machine. "Pistorius tweeted about the incident in November 2012: 'Nothing like getting home to hear the washing machine on and thinking its (sic) an intruder to go into full combat recon mode into the pantry!'" This guy.

[CN: Rape apologia] Scarlett Johansson, who has starred in three Woody Allen films, says that Dylan Farrow was "irresponsible" in naming her, among others, in her New York Times piece about having survived sex abuse at the hands of her adoptive father. "I think it's irresponsible to take a bunch of actors that will have a Google alert on and to suddenly throw their name into a situation that none of us could possibly knowingly comment on. That just feels irresponsible to me." And further: "I think [Allen will] continue to know what he knows about the situation, and I'm sure the other people involved have their own experience with it. It's not like this is somebody that's been prosecuted and found guilty of something, and you can then go, 'I don't support this lifestyle or whatever.' I mean, it's all guesswork. I don't know anything about it. It would be ridiculous for me to make any kind of assumption one way or the other." Welp.

Former Republican Congressman and current MSNBC host Joe Scarborough is maybe (?) considering a presidential run. Well, he's definitely signing books, anyway! Joe Scarborough is terrible, and also he would probably be the best candidate the Republicans could muster.

Here is some fun stuff from a 10th (!) anniversary panel of Lost. For some value of "fun," which may be "totally fucking infuriating," depending on your view of the finale.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

You Should Probably Not Write About Sexual Abuse If...

[Content note: childhood sexual abuse, rape apologia, ritual abuse, custody disputes.]

Are you considering writing a piece for Time wherein you use Dylan Farrow’s revelations about being sexually abused by her father as a platform to accuse feminists of “throwing reason to the wind,” aka believing survivors?

If you are, be cautious! There is a distinct danger that you may simply produce a poorly-reasoned antifeminist screed suggesting that you have no business criticizing anyone else’s critical thinking. Here are some tips to help you evaluate whether or not you are able to write this piece.

You should probably not write about Dylan Farrow and sexual abuse if you…

(a) don't understand timelines. Woody Allen was counseled about his inappropriate behavior towards Dylan as early as 1990. Mia Farrow discovered his relationship with Soon-Yi Previne in 1992. If you write things like “What about the fact that the charges were originally made during a bitter breakup and custody dispute between Allen and Dylan’s mother, Mia Farrow?” then you will likely look like an asshat.

(b) don't understand causation. When you write that “…while [his affair with Soon-Yi] does not make Allen a pedophile, Farrow may well have seen the relationship as quasi-incestuous child abuse, coloring her perception of his conduct toward Dylan,” you ignore the fact that causes have to come before effects. Farrow’s concerns predated the relationship, meaning that your pseudo-sympathetic claims about the roots of the accusations make you very likely look like an asshat.

(c) don't understand words. “Unfounded” and “false” are not synonyms. Treating them as such during a discussion of child abuse allegations will make you pretty almost certainly definitely look like an asshat.

(d) don't understand surveys and statistics. Trying to use a survey of child welfare workers to prove that coached “false” allegations are common (and there is a “50-50” chance that allegations are untrue) is a bad idea when the first line of the survey abstract reads as follows: “Findings indicate that it is uncommon for children’s allegations of abuse to derive from coaching. “ This makes you look like you have been randomly pulling numbers out of your asshat.

(e) don't understand "presumption of innocence." This is a legal term, with a specific meaning relating to the judicial process. It has never been a standard in the court of public opinion (see for ex: Obama the Kenyan-born Muslim). I do not personally owe Woody Allen the presumption of innocence any more than I personally owe him access to legal representation.

Furthermore, "presumption of innocence" is also not the same as “beyond a reasonable doubt,” despite the insistence of Allen’s defenders, who seem to think that any "reasonable"-sounding objection to Dylan Farrow's narrative should render Mr. Allen innocent in public opinion. "Beyond a reasonable doubt" applies to criminal cases. Not only does it not apply in public opinion, it doesn't even apply to all legal proceedings--including the Allen-Farrow custody case. A court has already found “clear and convincing evidence” that Allen's relationship with his daughter Dylan was harmful to her. If you are going to wring your hands about the “presumption of innocence” for Allen's public reputation, when the man has already failed the “clear and convincing” legal test, then you look like an asshat from the fine milliners of Law and Order: SVU.

(f) don't understand comparisons. Dylan Farrow’s descriptions of her abuse were not made in the context of Satanic Ritual Abuse. Cases wherein abusers were accused of having magic power or worshiping Satan are not relevant to Ms. Farrow’s narrative. No-one has alleged that Woody Allen was part of a Satanic cult. An entire cottage industry, rooted in Christian evangelical belief, peddled theories of “Satanic Panic” to law enforcement and mental health professionals in the 1980s. Conflating that group with “feminists” makes you look like an asshat to the 666th degree.

(g) don't understand internet connections. The entire Allen v. Farrow custody decision is available online, wherein anyone can read the judge’s reasons for declaring Allen’s suit “frivolous” and ordering him to pay Ms. Farrow’s court fees. The 33 pages are a quick read, and make it pretty easy to clear up the Allen camp’s obfuscation about timelines, facts, and the judge’s findings. Assuming that your readers do not have access to this makes you look like an asshat woven by machinery-wrecking Luddites in a BBC costume drama.

Still, even though you might not be ready to write this piece, there is hope. It’s entirely possible that you can get Time to publish your terrible anti-survivor manifesto under the heading “Feminism.” Because at Time, it seems, your asshat is in excellent haberdashing company.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Personal Investments in the Narrative of False Allegations of Sexual Violence

[Content Note: Rape culture; sexual violence; rape apologia.]

A friend asked me recently why it is that so many cisgender, heterosexual men are obsessed with the idea that false rape allegations are extremely common, especially when it's so demonstrably not true. Why it, she wondered, that even lots of otherwise reasonable and persuadable cis-het men will completely dismiss out of hand facts about the rarity of false rape allegations?

Well. That's a complicated question with a complicated answer—because there is a spectrum of motivations for why a cis-het man might be invested in the narrative of false allegations.

On one end of the spectrum are the men who are invested in defending rape culture in all its aspects, because they are rapists—and no one benefits more richly from rape apologia than rapists.

On the other end of the spectrum are the men who are invested in denying the ubiquity of sexual violence out of some misguided chivalrous instinct that minimizing its scope somehow shields its victims, or some inability to process that women live in a world where sexual violence is such a pervasive part of our lives, or some need to justify inaction because an acknowledgment of the reality of the pervasiveness of sexual violence would make their indifference inexcusable.

(And there are, somewhere on the spectrum or outside of it, cis-het men who have themselves survived sexual violence and use denial as a coping mechanism, not unlike a woman who survives sexual violence and then polices and victim-blames other women, as a way of distancing herself from the abuse.)

But it's the cis-het men occupying the broad middle of that spectrum whence comes most of the vociferous rejections of the fact that false rape allegations are not extremely common, as is frequently asserted.

And to understand why so many of those men, who are neither conniving repeat predators nor quivering philosophical deniers, it's important to understand that many of them have had sexual interactions that were borderline or actual sexual assaults.

Dr. David Lisak, who is a prominent researcher in the field of sexual violence, compiled here [pdf] the results of multiple studies where men were asked "questions about sexually violent behavior without labeling such behavior as 'rape' or 'assault.'" In other words, a participant may have been asked if he ever "had sexual intercourse [sic] with someone, even though they did not want to, because they were too intoxicated (on alcohol or drugs) to resist your sexual advances," a question to which respondents are more likely to answer "yes" than if they are asked straightforwardly if they've ever raped someone.

And the estimated percentages of men who acknowledge committing "rape, attempted rape, and sexual assault" in these studies ranges from 9-15%.

(The lowest percentage any study found, asking only about rape and not about attempted rape or sexual assault, was still 5%.)

So somewhere between 9-15% of men, by their own admission, have raped, attempted to rape, or sexually assaulted a woman at least once. And the vast majority of them have not been reported for these offenses.

That's a lot of men. And a lot of incidents of sexual violence that have never been reported.

That's a lot of men against whom truthful allegations could have been made, but were not. And one of the things we can infer from the fact they will say, "yes, I have had sexual intercourse [sic] with someone, even though they did not want to, because they were too intoxicated (on alcohol or drugs) to resist my sexual advances," but won't say, "yes, I raped someone," is that they don't think a lot of what constitutes sexual violence should be considered criminal behavior.

That means that a lot of men who insist that false allegations are common are really arguing that allegations of sexual violence are bullshit. It's not that they think nothing happened; it's that they think what did happen doesn't constitute sexual violence.

Sometimes, these are things they have done themselves.

There are a lot of men who have raped, attempted to rape, or sexually assaulted a woman at least once, and have not been charged. Many of them have never even been told by their victims, "You harmed me," no less had to face official allegations.

Some of them, perhaps especially the cis-het men who are sympathetic to feminist/womanist causes and acknowledge the existence of the rape culture on some level, may have a lot of guilt about having committed or attempted an act of sexual violence.

Sometimes a guilt like that manifests as anger or resentment, at oneself and/or at the very idea that what they did is considered assault. Sometimes it's accompanied by a sort of anxious relief, which itself can emerge as a sort of anger, that charges were never brought—and a reverberating unsettledness with the knowledge that they could have been.

And sometimes there is fear that "it will happen" again, a passive fear that deflects a man's personal responsibility for understanding and respecting meaningful consent, substituting in its place garbage tales about how sex is a messy business and "misunderstandings" happen. A fear that flourishes in the absence of responsibility; a fear that "it will happen" again, but next time he might not get so lucky as to escape consequence-free.

A guy who knows what he did was considered criminal sexual assault might be mired in a toxic stew of guilt and anger and anxiety and fear and haunting thoughts around what if charges HAD been brought. And that begets a reflexive need to defend the narrative of false rape allegations, because he's defending himself against a Sliding Doorsian alternate timeline where he was charged, and defending himself against viewing himself as a person capable of sexual assault.

It just becomes really fucking easy to say "a lot of women make false rape charges and ruin men's lives" instead of admitting "I am one of the many, many men whose lives were not even minimally interrupted after I sexually assaulted a woman who didn't even try to hold me accountable."

It is the ultimate projection, made by men who cannot sit easily with having harmed women.

And, yes, there are also a lot of cis-het men who have committed such acts against whom allegations have been made, either just person-to-person or in official reports to agencies ostensibly tasked with giving a shit—and have suffered no consequences. And they tell themselves, and everyone who will listen, that this was a "false report."

And, yes, there are also a lot of cis-het men who have never physically harmed a woman, but hold us in absolute contempt—the rank misogynists who believe with fervent resolve that every woman is a liar, a manipulator, a vengeful destroyer of men given half a chance. And they are invested in any narrative that casts men as the victims of women.

There are many reasons an inordinate number of cis-het men are invested in the narrative of false rape allegations. This is certainly not an exhaustive compendium.

It's just an attempt to bring some additional context to the discussion around the narrative of false rape allegations—most crucially, that the men invested in defending that narrative are most keenly aware that it's false. They have other reasons for mounting a defense.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Richard Cohen Goes Full Rape Apologist

[Content Note: Rape apologia.]

Richard Cohen, in his continuing bid to be the country's most contemptible columnist, goes full rape apologist in his latest column, accusing the New York Times of "rushing to judgment" against Woody Allen. This is the actual opening paragraph:

The defenestration of Woody Allen started Feb. 2 with a column in the New York Times by Nicholas Kristof. He began by saying all the right things: that allegations against Allen of sexually molesting Dylan Farrow, the 7-year-old daughter of his onetime companion Mia Farrow, had never been proved and that Allen "should be presumed innocent." Then Kristof threw Allen out the window.

Cohen thinks that undermining a survivor in the introduction to her first-person account of abuse is "saying all the right things." Of course he does.

He spends the rest of his column regurgitating indecent (and mendacious) apologia, getting paid for collating the greatest hits of Woody Allen's Twitter Apologists and calling it a column. He goes after Ronan Farrow for believing his sister, and draws an utterly absurd equivalence between himself and Dylan Farrow's own brother:

I am not here today to settle the matter. I have no idea what happened, but neither does Ronan Farrow, the child of Farrow and Allen and soon to be an MSNBC television host, who has gone after Allen with the Twitter version of an ax. Ronan Farrow's sincerity is not in doubt. But he was not present when the alleged crime took place, and he was a mere 4 at the time.

Oh my god. OH MY GOD.

And then he ends the mountainous heap of rank apologia thus:

The paper permitted a columnist to settle the functional equivalent of a personal score. He did not uncover a shred of new evidence; he did not provide us with a unique take on the matter. He simply believed his two friends, Dylan's mother and brother, and so, for a moment, did I. His was a powerful piece.

It's hard to imagine a more odious crime than child molestation. It's hard also to imagine the mortification of those falsely accused of it. If the Times thinks it has made matters right by printing Allen's rebuttal, it is both naive and wrong. It may or may not owe Allen an apology, but it owes one to its readers.

Richard Cohen says he has "no idea what happened" and isn't "here today to settle the matter." But he's sure that Allen has been falsely accused and that the New York Times owes their readers an apology.

(The Times does owe their readers, and Dylan Farrow, an apology—though not for the reasons Cohen imagines.)

Cohen is hardly the first person to call Allen's rebuttal "persuasive." Which is a subjective term. It is not persuasive to me, but then I'm not looking to be persuaded. Many of the people who are saying in Serious Tones that Allen's piece was persuasive are people who just needed anything that sounded like a vaguely coherent denial in order to breathe a sigh of relief that their favorite filmmaker isn't a sexual predator.

And I'm sure many of the people who found Allen's piece persuasive weren't consciously seeking to be persuaded, either—but found themselves persuaded all the same. Which is maybe because Allen's piece neatly hits all the points for which rape culture narratives prepare us: It just sounds so gosh darn reasonable to someone who hasn't spend a moment deconstructing how this shit works to subvert our critical thinking around sexual assault.

But, in any case, here's the thing about being persuaded: Predators are persuasive. They are extremely adept at convincing people of their innocence, even when they aren't famous auteurs surrounded by people who want to believe they're innocent. That one finds Woody Allen, or any other accused predator, "persuasive" constitutes exactly zero evidence of anything. Except your willingness to be persuaded.

What does it even mean to say that Allen's account is "persuasive"? It means that Dylan Farrow's account was not, for one thing. And it means that the person who found it persuasive imagines themselves to be some sort of magical identifier of sex predators, imbued with a fantastical talent for discerning the innocence of accused abusers simply by auditing the "persuasiveness" of their self-defenses. They can identity predators.

Such certainly is a luxury of having never been a victim.

Contact the Washington Post's Reader Representative at: readers@washpost.com.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

New York Times Publishes Woody Allen Rebuttal

[Content Note: Rape apologia; victim-blaming; abuse.]

Late Friday evening, the New York Times published, as the public editor had suggested might happen, an op-ed penned by Woody Allen denying his daughter Dylan Farrow's first-person account of childhood sex abuse.

Virtually everything I have to say about this reprehensible column, and the contemptible decision to publish it, I have already said here.

Allen responded in precisely the way I predicted, because abusers predictably respond with more abuse.

I do want to additionally note, however, note that Woody Allen's piece does not have a complementary into to Dylan Farrow's piece. While Nicholas Krisof felt obliged to note in the intro to Farrow's piece that Allen "deserves the presumption of innocence," there was no similar obligation on the part of the Times' editors to note in an intro to Allen's piece that Farrow "deserves the presumption of integrity."

So, for the record: A woman making the allegation gets a subversive intro. A man defending himself against allegation does not.

I also want to note that Allen's piece is accompanied by a 1988 photo of Woody Allen with Mia, Dylan, and Ronan Farrow, in which Dylan Farrow, then a toddler, is sitting on Allen's lap.

I don't want to speak for Dylan Farrow, and I don't want to presume what her feelings are about that image, but that is the sort of image which would be extremely triggering for lots of survivors—an image where one is pictured in close proximity to one's abuser. There is a real possibility that Dylan Farrow had to navigate past a profoundly triggering image just to access the Allen's apologia. That is an incredibly unfair and indecent thing to do to a survivor whose story they agreed to tell.

All of this—the subversive intro to Dylan's piece, the agreement to publish a rebuttal and give her abuse the last word, the picture at the top of Allen's piece—all of it is a shitty way to treat survivors and shitty journalism.

You can contact the New York Times Public Editor here.

-------------------

UPDATE: Dylan Farrow responds here: "Distortions and Outright Lies."

Also worth reading: Maureen Orth's "10 Undeniable Facts About the Woody Allen Sexual-Abuse Allegation."

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

An Observation

[Content Note: Sexual abuse.]

As more and more (and more and more and more) garbage articles continue to be written on the subject of "trying Woody Allen in the court of public opinion," I want to make the point (again) that Dylan Farrow's piece in the New York Times was essentially a request to the people who celebrate Woody Allen to not disappear her; to remember her.

It was not a request for further investigation of crimes for which the statute of limitations has already passed anyway. It was not a request for compensation or some other extrajudicial nod toward accountability. It was not even a request to deny Woody Allen work.

It was a request for acknowledgment that what happened to her matters.

It was a request to care about her, not a demand to hate Woody Allen. And all the noise about "trying Woody Allen in the court of public opinion" is trying to mask that, to drown it out. It's a clattering obfuscation to make sure we don't actually listen to what Dylan Farrow was really saying.

Woody Allen is 78 year old. He is fine. He has been fine, and he will always be fine. He doesn't need anyone to defend him against some fantasy that Dylan Farrow telling her story is going to ruin him.

Dylan Farrow, on the other hand, needs to be heard. She needs listeners.

And if all you have to say is some tired bullshit about the court of public opinion, you aren't listening.

UPDATE: Related and recommended reading: Jessica Luther's "The Court of Public Opinion."

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

She Said, He Said

[Content Note: Sexual assault.]

The New York Times public editor has announced that the paper may publish a rebuttal to Dylan Farrow's piece authored by Woody Allen.

Woody Allen has asked for, and may get, a chance to respond — in an Op-Ed piece in The Times — to a recent column and blog by Nicholas Kristof in which the filmmaker's adopted daughter detailed her memories of his sexually abusing her.

"They asked and we said, 'Yes, send it in,'" Andrew Rosenthal, The Times's editorial page editor, told me today by phone.

It's not certain that The Times will publish the piece. "It comes down to the editing process," he said, something that all Op-Ed pieces are subject to.

Publishing such a piece is unusual for The Times's opinion pages.

"Normally, we don't publish a direct response" as a full Op-Ed article, Mr. Rosenthal said, but as a smaller and less prominent letter to the editor. "In this case, it was so personal, we thought that we should."

...Mr. Rosenthal said he did not know when Mr. Allen's Op-Ed piece might appear, but indicated that it could be within the next few days.

So the decision comes down to the fact that "it was so personal," and not the fact that Woody Allen is a powerful, famous man with lots of privilege. Okay.

I find it interesting, ahem, that the issue was so personal to Woody Allen that it justifies publishing a response by Woody Allen, but not so personal to Dylan Farrow that it justifies not publishing a response by her abuser.

No less giving him, presumably, the last word. Unless the Times is also prepared to let Dylan Farrow respond in a subsequent piece.

I mean, it's so personal. By their own rationale, she should have that chance. Although, somehow, I'm guessing we're just going to draw a line under it once Woody Allen has his say.

Congratulations, New York Times. You're literally turning this story of childhood sex abuse into a "she said, he said." What a terrific way to encourage survivors to share their stories.

[H/T to Slade.]

--------------

UPDATE: I said a lot more about this on Twitter, which I've now Storified here.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

You Don't Get a Vote

[CN: dismissal of survivors]

Joining the long list of people saying terrible things in response to Dylan Farrow's open letter, columnist Robin Abcarian of the L. A. Times definitely knows better than survivors. For one thing, it apparently doesn't matter whether one believes Dylan or not:

In the long run, it doesn’t matter whether you believe the tragic story of Dylan Farrow, who alleges that her father Woody Allen sexually assaulted her 20 years ago when she was 7 years old.

Nor does it matter whether you believe Woody Allen, who was never charged with a crime, and who has steadfastly maintained his innocence.

Now, I'm not a fancy columnist with the L.A. Times, but I do have an internet connection, and with very little effort I've encountered a whole bunch of people for whom it does matter. Survivors and their allies, many of whom have spent much of the last few days explaining the high cost of disbelief.

And when a survivor explains how something feels, you don't get a vote on that. You don't get to put a survivor's feelings through your Validity Prism and judge them "disingenuous":

But honoring Allen is certainly not the equivalent of accusing Dylan of lying or not mattering, and it is disingenuous to suggest so. In 1993, Dylan’s accusations were taken very seriously by her mother, by doctors, by prosecutors. Allen was investigated for months and prosecutors chose not to file charges.

Neat! Also, can't she just shut up already?

Also, Dylan Farrow has had her say, and she has had it very recently. Only four months ago, Vanity Fair published a long profile of Mia Farrow and her children by Maureen Orth. In that piece, Dylan recounted her allegations against Allen in detail, and her enduring trauma, including the death of her 19-year-old sister Tam in 2000.

I'm so sorry that you don't like Ms. Farrow telling her story more times than you would prefer. But again: you don't get a vote. And as for this final bit of finger-wagging:

I earnestly believe that the contours of Farrow’s life are not going to change one bit if Woody Allen wins another Oscar.

Well, I'm glad you believe that earnestly. But still: you don't get a vote.

Earnestness doesn't change the fact that it's pretty fucking awful to 'splain to Dylan Farrow how she will be affected if her abuser is honored, yet again. It's deeply, deeply shitty to claim that believing a survivor doesn't matter because she was "taken seriously" when she first came forward. (Hint: not seriously enough, it seems!) It's frankly obscene to police how often, and when, she tells her story. And since we're throwing the term around, it is definitely disingenuous to insist it doesn't matter whom we believe, despite the chorus of survivors explaining otherwise.

Telling us not to "take sides" is a cruel joke. You clearly have picked one, Ms. Abcarian. And it's not the one where the survivors are standing.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!