[ad_1]
"ASIA ARGENTO LAUNCHES TWO OF THE #METOO MOVEMENT," begins Heller's statement. It defines the second phase as a phase in which "all victims, whether or not they have lived a life without blemish, should have the courage to come forward and not be afraid that the abuses they complain about are dynamic in their lives. history. Which means that someone who has what Heller calls a "gray area" in his past as Argento – this "gray area" is the question of whether she took advantage of the teenager who has already played his son in a movie – should always be able to talk about the abuse that they have suffered. It is like a reversal of the Bible: "Let him who has never sinned cast the first stone."
Is not it redundant? All the while, #MeToo insisted that any imperfections of an accuser should not keep them silent. When information about Bennett's allegations was made public, for example, many people in the movement responded by saying that they did not invalidate Argento's stories that they had been abused. "Many perpetrators of sexual violence are themselves victims," wrote my colleague Hannah Giorgis, echoing these responses. "It does not absolve Argento of his alleged crimes or make his own history of victimization null."
Asia Argento, #MeToo and the complex issue of power
It is difficult to avoid a suspicion of another motive, then, d'Argento acting as if she were the first champion of this point of view. The statement offers the supposed expanded scope of "phase two" even to Bennett, who, "interestingly," thinks that Argento has the right to denounce her despite her "troubled history". history, listing "his stuck acting career", "a lawsuit against his own parents", "a history of drug use" and police investigations into allegations of misconduct with minors . It is unclear whether the public should ignore these "troubled pasts" in "phase two" or whether "phase two" simply means paying more attention to this accuser's problems.
Heller's statement calls Argento and Bennett "a backdrop for crazy sexual interactions," but it's no disputed that a $ 380,000 deal was struck with Bennett in 2017, of which $ 250,000 was paid. Argento says the deal was made because his late partner, Anthony Bourdain, simply wanted to stop Bennett's extortion efforts against Argento, even though she said Bennett had assaulted her. She now says that she will not pay the rest of the colony. Bennett's story is that the agreement was, as stated in the documents, that Time obtained a copy of the recognition that Argento had behaved inappropriately with him.
What is the wider world supposed to do with these competing stories? Heller's statement excites the media for trying such situations in the "Public Opinion Tribunal", allowing "false news". But she also expresses the hope that "the court of public opinion will ultimately determine that Asia has never had inappropriate sexual contact with a minor, but it was instead attacked by Bennett and could even suffer from the retreat of a smear campaign led by people already accused of having an interest in their accusers being deprived of credibility.
Source link
