Who Is Allowed to Be Monstrous?

Casey Affleck’s response to abuse allegations follows a familiar narrative


“I guess people think if you’re well known it’s perfectly fine to say anything you want. I don’t know why that is. But it shouldn’t be, because everyone has families and lives.”

This is what Casey Affleck told Variety late last year in reference to the sexual abuse allegations he settled out of court in 2010. It was only a short aside in his 2,000-word cover story with the magazine, wherein his creative career was chronicled and heralded in great detail. He was and still is enjoying an unprecedented amount of publicity due to his Oscar-nominated performance in Manchester by the Sea.

The abuse allegations, now back in the spotlight, are quite serious. Violent grabbing, sneaking into beds, verbal disparagement, manipulation, intimidation. While they’ve been covered a lot — by Elle, TimeThe Atlantic, Vox, Teen VogueThe VergeNew York Magazine, The Daily Beastto name a few — every article seems to circle the same, haunting drain: Why does nobody seem to care?

It’s a question that became all the more pressing on Sunday night after Affleck took home the Academy Award for Best Actor in a Leading Rolestood on stage, face all aglow, and said: “I’m here because of the talents and goodwill of so many people they are impossible to name.”

Well, he’s right.

For women, men of color, people of other…the question of why nobody cares is a rhetorical one, and the answer is not mysterious so much as disturbing. Power, prestige and success have always had a short-term memory where the transgressions of white men are concerned. Woody Allen, Mel Gibson, Donald Trump, Johnny Depp, Sean Penn, Alec Baldwin, Charlie Sheen, Hugh Grant. It’s terrifyingly easy to rattle off the names of men who have continued to find fame and fortune following disgusting, often-criminal behavior.

“Isn’t that the crazy part of all of this? About being alive right now? That so much of your life — your world — can be destroyed by something like this?…Why am I being punished?…Do you even know any of the women who came forward?…I’m not perfect but I’m not saying I’m perfect…but this is fucking hard for me…”

The above sounds a lot like Casey Affleck, doesn’t it? It’s actually a line from the most recent episode of Girls, wherein a rich and famous white male writer invites Hannah (Lena Dunham) over to defend himself against sexual abuse allegations. The episode is subtle, brilliant and nuanced as it guides viewers to almost sympathize with this man — he’s smart and well-spoken, kind even, and he seems genuinely hurt and authentic in his love for his daughter — but ultimately he proves the allegations right. It was written before Affleck’s PR tour. The parallels are chilling and yet unsurprising. This narrative is not new.

The man in the episode is delusional, of course, so unaware of his role in society that he actually believes in his own goodness and innocence. This is a side effect of privilege we’ve seen play out across race and class relations as well. But abusive men are not — as gory movies and sensational media want us to believe — always so consciously and conspicuously monstrous. Sometimes they march with us and then treat us like meat at a bar. Sometimes they are kind and love their daughters and knit their eyebrows together and just don’t understand why we would do this to them.

Why we would do this to them.

“I was hurt and upset — I am sure all were — but I am over it,” Affleck told the New York Times.

He was over it.

Men and all people are far more complex than we give them credit for. It’s why so many accused men will say “Oh, but I could never” and people who love them will say “Oh, but he could never” but the truth is, he could and he might and so often he did and he will. Intellectual condemnation of misogyny and mistreatment of others do not make anyone exempt from participating in them, and as long as we fail to look inward where prejudice and conditioning and internal contradictions are concerned, as long as we continue to trust the words of men over those of their victims, people like Affleck will thrive.

“I believe that any kind of mistreatment of anyone for any reason is unacceptable and abhorrent, and everyone deserves to be treated with respect in the workplace and anywhere else,” Affleck told the Boston Globe yesterday, in a profile entitled “Oscar in hand, Casey Affleck now in the spotlight in his own right.”

And in so doing Affleck did what so many powerful white men have been able to do before him: use his platform and privilege to clear his name and conscience in one fell swoop.

Photo by Jason LaVeris/FilmMagic via Getty Images.

Get more Pop Culture ?
  • Arden

    Haley, you’ve done an amazing job highlighting the twisted thinking many rapist’s have – the line “he was over it” hit me like a truck. Thank you for this. Thank you thank you thank you.

  • Harling Ross

    “Sometimes they march with us and then treat us like meat at a bar.” This line, this piece — so good. Thanks for adding a few more drops to a bucket that should be much fuller, Hales

    • Sarah Odum

      exactly the line i was going to highlight! Haley’s writing is so damn poignant and good and necessary right now. Thank you! Keep it up.

    • Molly D

      Yep, good quote. One’s own actions speak louder (or, should) than merely publicly proclaiming solidarity with “people of other.”

    • Victoria Anderson

      Dude. This line. Happens too often.

      When I saw previous abusers of myself and friends holding up signs or posting solidarity statements about the Women’s March I was taken aback and this article Haley wrote summed up all my feels.

      These men seem altruistic and progressive but as Haley mentions, they are monstrous in their own ways. My thoughts on that brought me to this article: https://thedevelopmentset.com/male-feminism-is-fakery-be-a-femally-f109ef37e9a3#.yo1uq1pit

      I don’t full agree with it but this line hit home: “I believe that every man is a sexist. Every man has the potential to make remarks that are sexist, express opinion that put women at a disadvantage, or act with inappropriate force. They may not mean to do so, as it’s a form of unconscious bias.”

      It might broaden your thinking of this or perhaps, make you feel at ease that there are men out there willing to be allies/willing to read this beautiful piece you wrote, Haley.
      A lot of times I think that if these men commit themselves to looking like they have some ounce of compassion they are free to do whatever they please. Twisted. Strange. Scary to see play out with your own eyes.

      • june teu

        This is where calling them on their behavior kindly BUT FIRMLY applies. This takes courage because so often they are totally unconscious and likely consider themselves to be a modern man, so graceful illumination is a fine art we must all master! It’s difficult for someone to realize that they have been perpetuating disrespect, and embarrassing. So be kind. But be firmly correct.

  • WHOA. Powerful. Very well done, Haley. Gonna share the dickens out of this one.

  • Emma

    Bravo. Gosh, how twisted isn’t just everything when the complaints from the abusive men gets focused on (and gets recognition). The abusers (hurt) feelings are so immensely unjustified and IRRELEVANT.

  • Laura

    THANK YOU EVERY LINE WAS CORRECT. Honestly. Thank you!!!

  • B

    “It’s why so many accused men will say “Oh, but I could never” and
    people who love them will say “Oh, but he could never” but the truth is,
    he could and he might and so often he did and he will.”

    That single sentence deserves an award!!!!!!!!! Thank you, Haley.

  • Molly D

    The argument would be more compelling if Chris Brown’s continued success wasn’t such a reality.

    • Kelsey O’Donnell

      But I think it is compelling when you compare and contrast Nathan Parker and Casey Affleck. The two are in much similar situations than Affleck and Chris Brown, and provide for a better analysis of the role of race.

      • tosh79

        not at all, Parker was involved in a gang rape, the victim of which has committed suicide. Not quite the same as being an inappropriate seedy douche.

        • Kelsey O’Donnell

          A) Parker was acquitted after a full and fair trial; B) Affleck settled out of court, not a confession, but his case was never put through the ringer like Parker’s, making Affleck’s case a lot more suspect; and C) assault is assault, brother.

          • tosh79

            not saying it’s not bad, nor worthy or the ire directed at him, but there is a sliding scale… unless you thing pushing someone is the same kind of assault at stabbing them….

        • b.e.g.

          exactly. well said. glad it’s coming from a man

        • Fat Monica

          THANK YOU. not at fucking all the same.

    • Lacey Bergevin

      I just saw concert tickets for Chris Brown on Groupon – that has to be an embarrassing form of karma

    • ella

      His is one of the most disturbing cases because there is unequivocal blatant evidence. (Whereas in Caseys case ‘allegations’ are easier for some people to dismiss)
      That horrific photo of poor Rihanna’s face should have been the absolute end of his career without question. And yet, Grammy performances, album sales, concerts…
      It’s truly repulsive.

      • Leah

        He hardly gets covered in the UK media FYI. After he battered Rihanna, lots of newspapers condoned his behaviour and have never reviewed a record or performance of his since.

      • june teu

        It’s because she took him back.

    • ValiantlyVarnished

      Yeah but Chris Brown’s “success” is nothing like what it would have been had the incident never occurred. Chris Brown still gets horrible press – meanwhile people like Johnny Depp are getting major roles in JK Rowling films. Not quite the same thing.

      • Fat Monica

        does he?? hes done countless violent things since then (see: good morning america incident, karreuche admitting he beat her, etc) and still gets to record, tour, make money etc etc. people know hes a dick but forget the specifics bc it isnt rehashed constantly.

  • Kelsey O’Donnell

    This is a great post.

  • tmm16

    My stomach dropped at the end. Every sentence is so honest and true. I sent it to my younger brother to read. Your best work yet, Haley.

  • Leslie Ortiz

    I really enjoy it when MR writes real pieces like this. Keep it up!

  • Liv Anderson

    Thank you so much for talking about this

  • Olivia AP

    Haley, this is excellent.
    What is worst and I thought I saw it in a tweet that has been everywhere is that people say all these “allegations” damage men’s careers. How so?
    But they do affect the careers of the victims. That is so fucked up

  • BarbieBush

    Omg what are you going to do when Casey invites YOU over??? 😉

  • BarbieBush

    But like..what are you supposed to do about this? Yes this is annoying that rich guys get away with everything… But I feel no guilt about seeing Manchester by the Sea. I don’t even understand if I’m supposed to or not? Am I supposed to? I am actually asking.

    His performance was fucking good. He is a good actor in everything I have seen him in. This is the same story with like all these cases…Woody Allen, Roth.. I like their stuff and I am not willing to apologize for something I don’t think I can control..ie. what speaks to me artistically. But I am supporting them!!! Even when I “borrow” music and movies from online I am still like somewhat saying it doesn’t bother me ENOUGH to not watch it. Right??

    I have heard people say they can separate Woody Allen from his movies. Everybody fucking loves Annie Hall!!!!! but it isn’t really separate. And I am adding to his power by liking it anyway. I still watch it and think ew god he is gross but I know that isn’t enough.

    I have basically settled on the fact that I know its not good but I’m going to do it anyway. Because it seems like its either that or not watch or participate in these works of art that have moved me TO MY CORE and continue to do so. I think the art world across all genres is littered by these dudes- the whole world is– and isn’t not participating also giving them some power??

    • Grace B

      Agree with you — the movie was phenomenal and his performance was spectacular. This one has been a hard one to decide how to feel about it.

      • Thorhildur Asgeirsdóttir

        This is tough because we *are* condoning and glorifying him by paying to see his movie. And if it’s OK in that instance, when the art is really just so good that oh we’ll let it pass this one time… then what is stopping us in other circumstances?

    • Iva Quint

      Ahhhhh this is how I feel. I didn’t know about his sexual predation allegations for a long time after I had watched Manchester by the Sea, long after I had decided it was one of my favorite films I had ever seen and that Affleck’s performance was one of the most powerful I had ever seen. It is SO TOUGH to negotiate the disappointment I feel about his behavior because Lee Chandler was so so compelling and nuanced and I felt so much sympathy and empathy for the character. So glad to know I’m not alone in this struggle

    • Olivia AP

      I get you. As a former Annie Hall fan I got to a point in which I was feeling very contradictory in caring about the victims of sexual assaults and watching movies by abusers. So as hard as it was I had to sacrifice what may entertain me in order to stay true to my beliefs.
      I think once I read a letter by Dylan Farrow in which she said that it crushes her to watch her idols work and praise her abuser, it made me feel shitty to watch his movies. So I think we have to be more empathic for the victims and also condemn this men which ultimately will help women as a whole.

    • Haley Nahman

      Re: separating art from artist, I won’t comment on it philosophically, but practically speaking, I’m not convinced it’s the most progressive approach. I understand supporting an artist’s work before their crimes have surfaced, but as soon as they have, I think we owe it to their victims to no longer lift them up and glorify them for their work. To no longer forgive them and sweep their behavior under the rug, thereby forging a path for men just like them to follow in their steps. If we condemn white men the way everyone else is condemned, other artists will rise and take their spots. I’m not worried about a shortage of good art. The world is filled with amazing people with compelling perspectives.

      • Excellently put.

      • ValiantlyVarnished

        Well stated.

      • june teu

        True because they gain confidence and power by stealing from the woman they abused. It’s sick. That’s why it’s wrong.

    • YT

      I guess my response to this kind of thing, and in general, as I fight what I can against the patriarchy in general is, no, do not go see his movies because your dollars are your votes and one of the only things you/we have left to exert power over a system that systematically devalues us. I’m not scolding though, obviously do what you want, its just the way I am seeing things now a days and trying really hard to do whats right for the for the world by only giving my support to businesses/ people/ systems that will support me back.

    • Thorhildur Asgeirsdóttir

      This is tough because we *are* condoning and glorifying him by paying to see his movie. And if it’s OK in that instance, when the art is really just so good that oh we’ll let it pass this one time…. then what is stopping us in other circumstances?

    • I can’t do that. In fact, I refuse to watch or read or listen to anything by people like Affleck or Allen or any of those other gross men. They’re not seeing a scent from me or getting a minute of my attention, unless it’s in reading something bad about them. I would be disgusted with myself if I did.

      I endorse people with my hard earned dollars and avowed white supremacists, racists, and abuser and the like do not get any $ from me. I don’t care how incredible the book or movie is.

    • ValiantlyVarnished

      I get what you are saying but there comes a point when we merely become accessories and enablers and apologists to this type of behavior. Every time you buy a movie ticket you are reinforcing the silencing of victims and the glorification of abusers. You are in effect telling the world that this is okay. And it’s interesting to me that white men get the benefit of ” their art being separate from the artist” when men of color and most women do not.

  • I kind of blame A-list Celeb actress not to refuse being lead role with these guys. Check this video Roman Polanski getting Oscar and see how Meryl Streep enthusiastic about him getting Oscar!

    If these powerful woman figures don’t stand with these voiceless woman who is gonna defend them? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXnNOBj26lk

    Or so many “respected” female actress who agree on acting Woody Allen movies.

    • Grace B

      I just watched this for the first time, and frankly it reminds me why I left the entertainment business (my career there was hella short lived, not for me) — it encourages that feelign of being special or an outsider in some way. What I’m seeing is that Roman Polanski is the “outsider” getting rewarded and all of this Hollywood folks also are the outsider in some way (regardless of their fame or popularity) and thus are excited to see “one of their own” rewarded. It’s kinda twisted. That’s my 2 cents, anyway.

  • Amelia Diamond

    “as long as we continue to trust the words of men over those of their victims…” <– this is always my biggest point anytime anyone says anything like "well how do we know she's telling the truth?" what the fuck? innocent until proven guilty, ok, but why are so inclined to disbelieve or be skeptical (too light of a word) of those who come forward after an attack?

    we talked about this in the round table surrounding Kesha and "Dr. Luke": when a woman comes forward as a victim of abuse – especially in a celebrity setting – the FIRST reaction almost always seems to be "she's lying, she's doing it for attention/fame/money." Except what woman's life has been made easier by coming forward about this kind of thing, ever? Come forward against Casey Affleck et al and you're marked as a liar looking for money.

    Meanwhile, the men accused come off, as you point out Haley, unscathed. It's insane. Thank god you wrote this because I get so mad that I can't form fully thought-out sentences on the topic.

    • Kaitlin

      This hits me in my heart. Believe victims. BELIEVE VICTIMS.

      • Rose Thompson

        Why should a man have his life RUINED at the mere word of a woman? I point to you those examples of male students who have lost scholarships and educational opportunities all because the school did just as you said, it believed the victim. Even after the victims admitted to having LIED, one case simply to get another boy jealous and another to gain sympathy from a male in whom she was interested, those men accused of assault found it impossible to return to the life they had once known. So, why is it you believe a woman is MORE deserving of belief than a male? I think that, in itself, is sexist in nature. No one individual deserves more belief over another, male or female. This is why we have INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY in this country. It provides for EACH to have their day in court and for the truth to come out. Sometimes the truth and guilt will prevail and sometimes it will not. That is the way of it. But as it has been said, I would rather a guilty man go free than an innocent man lose his life or freedom by going to jail. It would seem, you do not agree.

  • Natasha

    What a piece! And such a powerful headline too.

  • Yasmin Samolat

    yes yes yes yes yes.
    thank you for this.

  • Katy

    How do the MR writers always manage to say everything so perfectly?

  • Delphine Gintz

    “powerful white men”…this gives me chills. Great writing, I had never realised how easy people make it for them to get away with stuff like that.

  • Excellent piece, thank you for writing it.

  • Ashley

    “Why we would do this to them.” -> This point is so important, especially when it comes to men with “potential” like an athlete or a young actor. I feel like its way too easy to push the narrative to why a woman is trying to destroy someone’s reputation rather than why she’s trying to get justice for someone committing a crime.

  • Kattigans

    Its especially interesting when thinking about Casey’s career contrasted against Nate Parkers. Both stories broke within the same time frame, yet one wins an Oscar and the other loses out on his career. Both men are not justified in what they, but society as a whole treats them completely differently. And the Girls episode could not have come out with any better timing. Kinda like when they had their epsidoe on Kitty Genovese murder and the next day her murderer dies. Are Girls and South Park predictors of future headlines and stories?

    • b.e.g.

      Let me ask you something? Would you be saying the same thing if Birth of Nation had won an Oscar? Would you be shouting how unfair it is that a man who got away with gang rape won an Oscar?

      I ask because this entire thread has turned ugly due to the comparisons of Affleck and Parker, white powerful male, black not so powerful male. Because there have been lots of public figures, white males and black males, where the victims did not get justice because rape and other sexual abuses are difficult to prove.

      • Kattigans

        Yep I would be saying the same thing. I clearly stated both of them are not justified in what they did. And life is very much unfair. No question about that and not something that needs to be explained. Also, how has this entire thread turned ugly because of comparison between two men, one white and one black, who are in the entertainment /movie industry and who both have dealt with accusations of sexual harassment and/or sexual assault?

        Sorry, your entire point is a little lost on me.

        • the witches waiting

          How is a great question. It is the best question. This is what the article is about, no? She’s discussing the power dynamic of a certain group when applied to a behavior and not excusing this type of behavior when anyone else does it. Your original comment is clear on that point also. I think it’s time for me to head out of the comments section because some are making me feel nervous. Someone please let me know if I misread something because I am so very confused.

          • Kattigans

            I understood the article and the author’s points that’s why I added to them with my own comment. I don’t really know why they’re being explained to me? My question about “how” was to another commentator…not sure where you got thrown into the mix by jumping in.

          • the witches waiting

            There’s been a definite misunderstanding; I was agreeing with you! But rereading my comment I understand how it could be (totally is isn’t) unclear. I asked “how” upthread in another comment too and was clinging to a life raft of a comment (yours asking how has this thread turned) that made sense to me!

          • Kattigans

            Got it! Definitely a little misunderstanding – thanks for clarifying!

          • the witches waiting

            You’re welcome and thanks for understanding

      • the witches waiting

        For curiosity’s sake only, I’m genuinely and honestly asking and not trying to be rude at all, how the first paragraph made it into this comment when Kattigans says “Both men are not justified in what they did”?

        • b.e.g.

          Yes, I understand your point. But that qualifier is insufficient. Certain comparisons are justified, like Woody Allen, Roman Polanski, etc. both got away with sexual abuse. However, the tone and underlying sentiment on here seems to be that Affleck was treated differently from Parker because of race. IMO, this is not a fair comparison. Parker participated in gang rape, whereas all we know about the Affleck case is that he is crass and arrogant, and the woman did not like his sexual advances. One should not compare a gang rapist to non-rape case as they are completely different animals. Just as you wouldn’t compare a Ted Bundy to someone who committed vehicular manslaughter.

          • witches say bye sometimes

            Guess I feel like that qualifier is sufficient enough since what else is anyone supposed to say? You asked if the tables were turned that people would be angry and I believe the answer is yes as has been stated. So, I’m at a loss for what anyone else is supposed to say or do since the article ultimately revolves around the power dynamics of the group this particular person belongs to and in this instance, race is pertinent.


The comments I’ve read that draw a comparison don’t excuse any bad behavior and I guess I’m reading it as if you could be excusing his. My read is that you think if the roles were reversed that people would be ok with it and I don’t believe so, that’s why I was curious about your initial question. Don’t really dig your last comparison but, I will add there isn’t less loss in either instance. Saying ‘at least this other thing didn’t happen…’, ‘the magnitude of this isn’t as great as…’, ‘that’s not as bad as…’ is not your place, it will never be your place and it’s not mine either. If either of us gets there, it’s time to consider where we went wrong because saying or believing those things will not benefit the people who would need to be comforted in the first place.

This particular, specific combo of race and gender is essential to the discussion of the men mentioned in the article and even in the comments. Where other men are mentioned is not to excuse anything but to further explore the same idea of who is allowed to be monstrous as the title said and who we believe and why. You believe certain things, drew certain conclusions about who is telling the truth, to what extent, for what reasons they may or may not be and if the method in which the situation was approached was appropriate (which was an option and legally sound enough that it wasn’t dismissed in the first place) and the outcome (sometimes, settling is just settling-legally, figuratively or literally) even though you are most likely not any more privy to the details than we are. Those beliefs seem to fall in favor of the lines of the power dynamic that the article and other comments have mentioned which, again, don’t excuse anyone else’s behavior but throws into relief the level of social freedoms afforded white men. Because some of the men you did mention for direct comparison maintain their high social and financial standing and the one who doesn’t is not like the others… Again, that’s only my reading. We may have to agree to disagree and thanks for answering my question.

  • Jill Puente

    Your best yet, Hales. <3

  • Caitlyn

    Excellent piece. The women are belittled and shamed for and the men are forgiven if enough time goes by. So many props and virtual hugs for Brie Larsen for showing her disdain for Casey Affleck. I’m sickened that she’s had to present him with two awards while outwardly protesting him. There are so many good actors out there and I don’t feel that those who treat their coworkers like pieces of meat should be awarded. Like you said below, there’s no shortage of good art, there are other actors. I can’t bring myself to see that movie because I would feel like I’m endorsing sexual abusers and I’m still sick from the “locker room talk” of the election being brushed under the rug.

  • Junglesiren

    Yeah… Nate Parker is the only filmmaker who hasn’t gotten away with this crap. Hmmm, curious. I wonder why that is, I mean, his film was fast-laned for an Oscar at Sundance, and a tsunami of praise followed… until the allegations. They crushed him and his brilliant movie (since I never give money to rapist/molester’s for their films – not even the ones only accused of it). Fortunate for Barry Jenkins that he’s not a rapist/molester or any other type of woman attacker because he, for sure, would not have even been nominated like Affleck was… just ask Nate Parker.

  • Junglesiren

    When there is no “proof” of anything we have to decide who we believe. That’s all there is to it. If you read the allegations and the claims then you choose a side. I tend to side with the person making the sexual harassment allegations because it’s such a difficult thing to do – to put yourself in the bullseye of hate. Especially in this particular case – I read the transcripts. What a guy Affleck is! Yes, sometimes women lie… and sometimes men do too. I’ll err on the side of caution by standing behind the “victim” when there is a he-said-she-said situation. And yes, that’s because I myself have been molested and didn’t say anything – as most women don’t because of the ugly, very embarrassing repercussions. For men, perhaps it’s a lot easier for them to side with the accused when they themselves have never harassed a woman. Perhaps they put themselves in his shoes and imagine being accused falsely of such a thing and it just seems impossible… so they err on the side of caution by standing behind the man accused of sexually harassing a woman.

  • b.e.g.

    I cannot believe that some of you ladies are comparing Affleck’s misbehaviour with employees with the Nate Parker case. Completely different situations. And remember that settling out of court is NOT an admission of guilt, it is merely “make this go away.” Affleck and Phoenix, two immature men, used to getting their way. No rape here. No forced sex. No suicide. Stupidity. Putting themselves in a sexual harrassment situation. Many of the allegations sound so false, it is a joke. They basically handed the gold diggers the prize.

    Nate case: two popular college athletes having sex with a passed out drunk girl on a college campus. Lying about it, lying there had been a second guy involved, until she tricked them into admitting the second guy because she claimed to be pregnant, and then a campaign in school to have her ridiculed and harrassed by the college population as the girl who cried rape. She was probably emotionally unstable anyway. She liked Nate, gave him a blow job the day she met him, and the next day accepted an invitation to date, waited in a bar for two hours for him (Nate) to show up, meanwhile accepted drink after drink from total strangers (men at the bar). She killed herself.

    Nate’s demise with “The Birth of a Nation” had more to do with the movie itself being weak. While it was prepped to make money because of its timely topic, many black young men being murdered by police, etc., the movie was not strong enough to overcome the rape trial.

    The crime was the slap on the wrist. No conviction.

    Be choosy with your judgements. Read realible sources, not trashy reports.

    • ValiantlyVarnished

      Well then let’s compare it to Woody Allen – who his own daughter accused of molesting her (and he admitted to doing so to a therapist – this info was included in a deposition which can be read online). Or how about Roman Polanski who raped a 13 year-old girl?? Both of these men are continually lauded by Hollywood.

      • b.e.g.

        In these two examples, you are completely correct. Gross, despicable men. I was a teenager when the Roman Polanski thing happened. The entire country was indignant. Still cannot believe how that played out. Woody Allen, ugh!

      • b.e.g.

        Recently we happened on the movie Manhattan. Have you ever seen it? Mariel Hewingway’s character was supposed to be 16 I think? He was an old man in his 40s I think. Gross. And people love this movie. Ugh!

  • b.e.g.

    Haley, there is a reason why “abuse allegations follow a familiar narrative.” Because a woman makes an allegation does not make it true. Because you are a woman you shouldn’t necessarily side with the women. Side with the facts. Many women lie. Many an allegation is disproved. Where are you coming to the defense of the men whose lives/careers were ruined by false allegations? Actors, and other public figures benefit from the short memory of the masses, and because they have a public forum in which to defend themselves. But private citizens do not have such an advantage, and it is these men who, when falsely accused, can rarely recover their ruined lives after being falsely, often vindictive, accusations against them. Two personal experiences:

    A friend’s daughter, age 16, accused her stepfather of sexual abuse. The man was arrested, put in jail without bail for a week, then lots of stuff happened. The girl was lying. She admitted in an interview with a court shrink that she did it to punish him because he wouldn’t buy her a Mustang for her 16th birthday. Psychotic, manipulative little bitch. True story.

    Next door neighbor, tennis coach at our club. A rich woman from the club accused him of rape. Rape. Again, man arrested, blindsided, lost his job, can’t get a job as a tennis coach ever again. Why? Because her husband caught her fucking the tennis coach. To save face at the club he forced her to accuse him of rape. Meantime she had been buying him gifts, sending him on trips to Las Vegas with his buddies, and so on. Hardly an innocent relationship, she was cheating on her husband. It all came out in the poor schmuck’s trial. True story.

    Unfortunately, women are not always victims. They certainly know how to play the system, a system designed to help them, not to be abused.

    • tmm16

      If you believe the system is “designed to help” women, you missed the entire point of this article. Reread and think again.

      • b.e.g.

        Yes, I get your point. The system is not always fair, and doesn’t always work. But the main reason for that is that witnesses are unreliable or scarce. Allegations that cannot be concretely proven are difficult to prosecute. It’s not that the system is rigged against women. You can’t send a man to the gallows because someone “said” something. We are talking now, not the past. Yes, there have been cases where prominent figures should have been prosecuted (Sandusky). But I have lived long enough to know that the workplace now is a dangerous place for men. All a woman has to do is hint at wrongdoing by a male colleague and the guy is fired. And I’ve known women to use it as a threat. Plant a seed with the female supervisor, the guy out. Last week we had a girl claim her colleague touched her, she wanted him gone. The guy in question is a homosexual, has a husband, and two adopted children. He merely strainghtened out her shirt collar. That is why the system is failing, because women are stupid and vindictive. Peter cried wolf.

        You ladies have jumped on the wagon of political correctness. You are all defending this Nate guy as if he was a pillar of society just because he is black. The guy took advantage of a drunk/drugged vulnerable girl, and asked his buddy to join in. He is a pig. I don’t care that he was 19 years. Casey’s alleged behaviour was not at all on the same plane. Women want to be believed, but will not accept consequences for their own behaviour. That is the main reason Nate was found not guilty, because of the girl’s own behaviour leading up to the alleged rape.

        • Katrina Elizabeth

          Did I miss something? I don’t think anyone is defending Nate Parker.

          • b.e.g.

            By comparing the cases, Nate and Casey’s, some comments were that one guy wins an Oscar while the other has lost his career. Then the whole debate about how white powerful men get away with abuse, etc. Such generalizations only harm the discussion. Making it about race harms the discussion. Rape, sexual abuse, truly a complex issue, not one to categorize into neat little sections. Definitely not that one guy was black so he was crucified, while the “powerful white male” got away with it.

          • ValiantlyVarnished

            Nope. No one is defending Nate Parker. Merely pointing out the GLARING difference between how he was treated as opposed to Casey Affleck. Or if we want to split hairs – how someone like Woody Allen or Roman Polanski is treated.

    • Katrina Elizabeth

      When the cases reached the court in both of your examples, the truth came out. How did the system help them get away with their crime of false accusation?

      • b.e.g.

        Hi, Katrina, I am not sure what you mean. Neither woman was prosecuted for the false allegations. The men definitely got screwed. I was mistaken, the second example, tennis coach, it never went to trial. Charges were dropped after he’d lost basically everything.

    • Kirby

      Yes, people lie. All people lie. It isn’t gender-specific, and that’s not what this article is saying.
      HOWEVER, if you get your car stolen (definitely not on the same level as sexual assault, but here me out) and report that to the police, you will not be met with suspicion. You will be believed and the system will do what it can to bring you justice. That is not the case for sexual assault. If a woman is raped, the first response she gets is skepticism. She is questioned thoroughly not out of “following protocol” but out of disbelief. This is true, though the rates for falsely-reported sexual assault are no higher than that of any other crime. And then even if her abuser admits, he can STILL face no consequences.

      • b.e.g.

        Unfortunately what you say is true more often than not. Don’t get me wrong, I know that women who report sexual abuse often do not get fair treatment. It tends to be treated as a he said, she said, instead of how serious it is. Unless a woman is actually hospitalized as a result of the rape, she is not taken seriously. My complaints here are that one should not compare what Nate Parker did with the allegations against Casey Affleck. They are not at all the same. And making it about race just complicates things in a way that is not fair. Casey won an Oscar while Nate’s career was ruined? Casey is not a rapist. And the women did not press charges with the police against Casey for sexual molestation or harrassment, they sued him for money. See the difference? Why not report it to the police and have the police investigate his conduct on the workplace? They sued him for money.

        • Kirby

          Your complaints may be about the comparison between Affleck and Parker, but that is not what your comment said. In fact, neither Affleck’s name nor Parker’s was even mentioned in your comment to which I replied.
          No, your comment chose to ignore anything that was said in the article and instead chose to criticize Haley for not commenting on cases of false allegation. Which, is NOT what this article is about.
          I do recommend you go back and reread the article because I sincerely think you are missing the point.

          • b.e.g.

            I read the article. I have been responding to many comments on this thread so forgive me if I didn’t exactly address your comments. My comment to Haley meant to say that it is wrong to make judgements and passing sentence without the benefit of full information. A title that says “Who is Allowed to be Monstrous?” suggests she knows for sure that Affleck is guilty. The power of carefully chosen words, and carefully crafted sentences. Very like a demagogue. And I am sorry, but unless she was there and or privy to any of it, she does not know anymore than you or me. Sue for money, or report sexual misconduct to the police? It is clear to me.

            And no one writes articles exonerating the falsely accused.

            My other complaint here was about the comparison of Nate and Casey by some other commentators because one is a case of gang rape, and the other one of allegations, whether false or not, only they know. Police investigation vs suing for money.

          • Kirby

            I understand your concerns with this article assuming guilt. Yes, it has not been proven that Affleck is guilty, but you, too, are, assuming blame by accusing the women of lying. I don’t know why the victims chose to sue, but I don’t think that incriminates them any more than Affleck’s decision to settle out of court incriminates him. By sticking to this thread of logic, you are doing exactly that with which you find issue in this article.
            That being said, regardless of the specifics this article is speaking more to a principle and a phenomenon that you cannot deny. Affleck is merely the catalyst for this discussion. Getting caught up in the details is only a way to ignore the message.

          • b.e.g.

            Great point.

          • Haley Nahman

            Thanks for debating each other so thoughtfully and respectfully! It’s really refreshing.

            By the title of the article I meant to imply that white men have more leeway to be monstrous than other subsets of people. Whether Affleck himself falls in the category, I agree we can’t know.

          • the witches waiting

            And you said this in the article, Haley. This is why I’m so confused. You didn’t even accuse anyone of anything and yet there is so much… what, bizarreness? “Intellectual condemnation of misogyny and mistreatment of others do not make anyone exempt from participating in them, and as long as we fail to look inward where prejudice and conditioning and internal contradictions are concerned…” Unreal! You literally point to where this behavior stems from that hurts other women even as it protects people who don’t need it as you, or at least I thought, succinctly said in the last paragraph.

            It seems that whether or not anyone did anything (and some in the article did get charged by the law) doesn’t even matter; there are stronger protections for some people than others where the accusations themselves don’t even influence one’s upward mobility. LB4 sums it up well “The racial distinction is not meant to imply that certain races are more guilty of these crimes, only to point out a difference in the PUBLIC PERCEPTION of these crimes… [capitalization my own].”

            How do people understand the dynamics between the recent elections as operating on gender and not that the exact same kind of internal biases might be applied elsewhere when race is concerned (might be a rhetorical question since I think I already know the answer, at least for myself). I think there is some strong cognitive dissonance in the comments section. Super strong. You’ve done it now lol!

            On a side note: Kirby, ValiantlyVarnished tmm16 and others, can’t like some of your comments and replies since I guest comment but I liked them in my head for what it’s worth.

  • Ryan Thorne

    As a white man (sorry everyone, came out this way), it would be nice to have everyone drop the whole, “white dudes are racist, rapist monsters” thing when talking about individual people disrespecting women. I don’t think all black dudes are gangster rappers and basketball players because I’ve seen plenty on TV. Disrespecting women is clearly wrong. Period. How about we go after people as INDIVIDUALS and hold them accountable for their INDIVIDUAL transgressions. If I made a sweeping generalization about men of another race, I’d be justly crucified. Us white dudes don’t all get together and say, “Gee, I wonder how many ladies we can get away with assaulting.”

    That’s an infantile, reptilian way of thinking.

    • BarbieBush

      Nobody is mad you are white. I respect your two cents here and it IS nice to have a male perspective included..interesting though that this is the only comment you have ever made on the site..defending one of your perceived own. I think we are discussing something a bit stronger than “disrespect to women”. Women as a whole can deal with disrespect and are forced to basically consistently. But this is touching on things like molestation and rape..these things ruin the lives of people involved or actually kill them. And is usually considered a women’s issue.

      This is a forum used to women being open with other women and it is typically liberal and progressive. I understand the sweeping generalization bit can be discomfiting. But in this case, we aren’t making the sweeping generalization, we are using a broad term in a knowing way to describe a certain group of people with power. I don’t think many among us believe we are talking about all white men ever. I would guess many of us are in love with white partners who treat us nicely and are feminists themselves..

      So to me, this comment is sort of reinforcing the things we don’t like and work against. A man coming in, with no information on this site, its community, or our language, assuming we are mad you are born white and male and insulting us with a word “infantile” which is used literally for children and small people..a fetish that women are many times swept into.

      Feminism is so nice and fun because it doesn’t prescribe things on other people. It accepts whoever being whatever as long as it is with empathy, sensitivity and understanding. You should read and comment on some other articles on this site, I think it would help you feel more in tune with this “feminist” community and less attacked for being who you are.

      • Leslie Price

        I love this response! Just wanted to chime in to say that.

      • Ryan Thorne

        I appreciate your point of view and agree with you. There’s just a lot of rhetoric about evil white dudes going around, and we should be focusing on privilege and wealth and how the combination of the two can make it easier for a man, and a woman, to get away with repulsive behavior. I’ve never been to this site before, so I couldn’t comment before. Also, let me replace “disrespect” with “assault” in my comment to be more accurate. Thank you for the respectful response. It’s nice to engage in respectful dialogue. Raise hell, ladies!

        • the witches waiting

          Alright, I’ll answer that rallying cry.

          There’s been a lot of rhetoric about evil, dangerous non-white dudes (some of whom aren’t evil or dangerous…) for, like, since the dawn of time, some of it perpetuated by white men so what’s your point? Join the club. I feel like you’re deflecting but I don’t know anything about you except your race and gender, which to me would be irrelevant if you made a strong argument that directly responds to the article in question and doesn’t shadowbox with ideas you’ve never had to confront about a group of people you belong to. However, the comments read to me as if your feelings were injured because for once in history, the narrative has shifted to include people with certain types of privilege that can be dangerous. And the people the article discusses are white men. Not black men, not repulsive women. This article does well to note that some of that privilege stems from wealth and both, the article also does well to point out, can and often do stem from race. She is in fact focusing on one more subject area you seem insistent to leave out while not neglecting the others you mention.

          You also mentioned individuality and even as she makes a point to call men out by name, individually several times, you (as an individual), felt the need to clomp in on a site you admittedly didn’t bother to read more about which is called, can’t make this up: manrepeller.com, because someone mentions (with a distinctly uncharacteristic lack of reptilian venom might I add) members of a group you self-identify with. You don’t even realize you have the flexibility of choosing when to belong to a group or when to represent yourself individually because you probably don’t have to. The parallel you drew for a group the article doesn’t even mention and the consequences you believe you would “justly” incur (you wouldn’t be crucified. Mel Gibson, mentioned above, is presumably well, thriving and racking up awards nominations so why shouldn’t you? Dream big etc!) and that you felt you needed to include your race and gender reflects that.

          My take is that this article is measured, concisely and elegantly written and hardly as inflammatory as I believe you and many others will take this comment to be but it was still misunderstood so enthusiastically. How? Why? sigh

      • ValiantlyVarnished

        Thank you for encapsulating what is currently going on on this thread perfectly!

    • LB4

      The article is pointing out individuals. The author has named several specific examples and never stated that all white men assault women, or that all white actors commit crimes against women. She is merely noting a trend that white men who have been accused as a group typically do not face the same consequences as men of other races who have been accused. The comparison is white men who are known or justly suspected to have committed crimes against women vs. non-white men who are known or justly suspected to have committed crimes against women. The racial distinction is not meant to imply that certain races are more guilty of these crimes, only to point out a difference in the public perception of these crimes after they have been committed.

  • Alexia

    I am a 100% behind victims of sexual assault. But, at the same time, I also believe strongly in our justice system. Despite the fact that there’s a decent probability Affleck did commit these crimes, in the eyes of the law we should treat him as an innocent. Yes, just because a man is acquitted or never tried doesn’t mean the accuser is lying, but, without due process and the chance to see all the facts, it would be unfair for Affleck to have his career hurt.

    • ValiantlyVarnished

      He was sued. And he settled out of court for millions of dollars. So there is no “in the eyes of the law” in this case. He also made his victims sign a non-disclosure as part of the settlement. So while he gets to go around vaguely talking about his innocence they get to say nothing to defend themselves. They also get to deal with the stigma of speaking out in Hollywood. In all likelihood their careers have suffered and now that Affleck has won an Oscar and been validated by Hollywood their careers will suffer even more.

      • No one made them sign non-disclosure forms. They chose to.

        • ValiantlyVarnished

          Thanks for missing the point. Have a nice day.

          • Try having one next time that isn’t full of errors.

          • ValiantlyVarnished

            The amount of white male tears on this thread is hysterical. Thanks for the laugh though.

          • Your bigotry isn’t funny at all.

          • b.e.g.

            This is disrespectful to another commenter. I’ve read your comments and you are rather dismissive with anyone that disagrees with you. You may shout louder, but it doesn’t make you right.

          • ValiantlyVarnished

            Actually I debate with people on this site all the time and we are always respectful to one another. This is a really tight community of women. We call each other out when we feel we need to and no one plays the victim. It’s funny to me how this thread has been hijacked by people such as yourself and the commenter above. With thinly veiled attempts to derail the conversation and the narrative. As a woman and a minority I have come to spot this tactic a mile away. I’m not shouting – I have no need to. It’s clear for all to see. Have a nice day.

          • b.e.g.

            Hate to burst your bubble, but I too am a woman and a minority. Hijacked? All this emotion and no one seems to like facing facts. Conjecture. Passing judgement without knowing the facts. Passing off tabloid news as fact. When pointing out the transgressions of while males, why do you fail to point out all those black males that have abused and gotten away with it? You seem to focus only on white males. You are so transparent it is ludicrous.

          • b.e.g.

            And you WERE dismissive with the male commentator. He called you out. This is NOT a tight community of women. This is a community. Period.

      • b.e.g.

        V.V., the non-disclosure was imposed by the court system, not Affleck. Reason is so that they don’t take the money and then go around “trying” him in the media. In other words, take the money and run, and shut up. These two women didn’t really have much of a career in Hollywood. Casey had worked with them before, hired them to work on this stupid Phoenix lark of a project. The first one had quit, and returned because she couldn’t get a job anywhere. Hollywood wasn’t beating down her door. The other one asked her to come back at the behest of Affleck. The tit for tat, the refusal to give the women credits on the film, that is what they were pissed off about, and I conjecture that is why they pursued him, just to fuck him. Until we start hearing from all those other women that Casey abused, I will not place much credence on these allegations. I mean, if true, surely this isn’t an isolated incident, right? If this is his M.O. surely there are others. Look at Bill Cosby. The first woman was ridiculed until all the others came forward and by doing that they validated the first woman’s claims. I’ve worked with guys like Affleck, pretty faces, used to getting what they want, immature, always horsing around, treating the girls like one of the boys. Nothing much to it. If the women didn’t like getting sexual advances, they should quit and stay away. If you feel sexually harrassed, why are you suing for money? Why not simply make a police report?

        • ValiantlyVarnished

          During settlements the agreements are reached between lawyers. NOT the court system. This wasn’t a criminal case. Therefore a judge would only be present if the case had in fact gone to court and to adjudicate the final settlement. But it’s clear you are on the “blame the victim” train and I frankly have no time for it. Have a nice day.

          • b.e.g.

            Yes, you are right about the agreements, but you are mistaken, I am not on the “blame the victim” train. That is an ignorant comment, and nothing I have said suggests that. Simply put, if women sue for money, they want money. If a girl gest molested, sexually abused, she reports it to the authorities. In Nate’s case she reported it to the college police as is procedure in university campuses.

      • jacobsonrl

        If you read the details of the settlement, you’d know the settlement amount was never released. And he didn’t make them sign a confidential non-disclosure, it was mutual. What it boiled down to was the accusers being owed dues for working on the film.

  • Kendra Mittermeyer

    So glad MR is taking up more and more space for engaged, progressive, and mindful conversations. It would have been worth integrating Birth of a Nation into this discussion though… I appreciate all the author’s care to talk about race and intersectionality but we do have another potent instance of abuse allegations and very different repercussions – would love to know more details (as that story seems to have faded away – along w the grave import of that movie…) and the author’s thoughts…

  • thank you, thank you. i’ve been trying to sort out my feelings on this and you did it for me. i loved casey. fuck him for giving us a reason to not love him anymore.

  • ValiantlyVarnished

    I would like to add Brad Pitt to this list of men. A man who verbally abused (and possibly assaulted) his own child got a near standing ovation at the Golden Globes. To see the disparity and contradictions in how white males vs everyone else is treated all one has to do is look at what happened to Nate Parker: an Oscar shoo-in and Hollywood darling whose controversial past involving a rape trial and the suicide of his alleged victim torpedoes his chances in Hollywood. Would that have happened if he was not a black man? Probably not. Meanwhile you have Roman Polanski and Woody Allen (both of whom have admitted to their misconduct) being lauded with lifetime achievement awards. None of this is surprising – especially if you are a woman AND a minority. But that doesn’t make it any less infuriating.

    • b.e.g.

      Again with the comparison of Affleck to Parker! Drop the race card every chance you get.

      Tell me, V.V., if Birth of a Nation had won an Oscar, would you be shouting at the top of your lungs that a black guy who got away with gang rape should NOT have won an Oscar?

      Or is it that the girl was white, the guy was black, so it is all right, because the courts cleared him of wrongdoing?

      What is it? Women not getting justice? Or is it this just another platform to say that black men are treated unfairly because they are black?

      Parker participated in a gang rape. The courts decided that there was not enough evidence to convict him. His buddy, the other guy involved didn’t have as good a lawyer, he was convicted. Later the courts were forced to reverse the sentence.

      Casey is not a rapist. Brad Pitt? Surely every man that ever shouted at his teenage son is an abuser. OMG.

  • Elizabeth H

    This article hit me really hard. As a victim of sexual abuse and harassment by men of white privileged it is exactly this attitude of “sometimes they march with us and then treat us like meat at a bar” that has allowed this type of abuse to continue. Thank you for writing this and thank you for acknowledging a problem that I could never before put into words.

  • Meg S

    Oh, right, HE was hurt and HE was upset but HE is over it. What about the women he sexually harassed? Were they hurt and upset? Are they over it? These are the questions that should be asked, but of course they aren’t. Because Poor Casey Affleck™ has spoken.

  • proyectomas

    You wrote “did what so many powerful white men have been able to do before him: use his platform and privilege to clear his name.”. How about the abuse of power that the media and people like you use, to slander other people? Because he has denied the charges, and the two producers wanted money out of that situation (obviously if they had proof they would have gone to court and got much more). I think that Kenneth Lonergan said it best in his recent comment to an article “about myself, Casey, Affleck and Wesleyan’s supposed complicity in condoning sexual misconduct – and worse – by taunting me as a Wesleyan alumn after I won an Oscar last week is such a tangle of illogic, misinformation and flat-out slander that only the author’s presumed youth can possibly excuse his deeply offensive display of ignorance, and warped PC-fueled sense of indignation. His random use of the terms “sexual misconduct” “sexual harassment” “sexual abuse” and “sexual violence,” as if they were legally or physically interchangeable, only indicates the reckless sloppiness of his thinking. Never mind what he doesn’t know about the movies and how they are cast: That’s not as important, although it does underline that he doesn’t mind knowing nothing about his own subject. But frequently dropping the word “alleged,” which grown-up journalists mindful of their own vulnerability to libel suits are careful to include when they compose equally wrongheaded pieces on this subject, he writes as if Casey Affleck were actually guilty of a crime. In fact, it was alleged 7 years ago, in a civil lawsuit for breach of contract, that Casey sexually harassed two women formerly in his employ. Casey denounced the allegations as being totally fabricated. Like most civil suits, this one was settled out of court by mutual consent on undisclosed terms. In other words nothing was proved or disproved. So how does [] dare to write as if he knows who was telling the truth and who was not? Anyone can sue anyone for anything in this country; the unsubstantiated details go in the public record and stay there. Somebody as interested in actual as opposed to merely vocalized social justice as Mr Aberle presumably is, should unwind his tangled, immoral chain of reasoning and start over at the fundamental precept that an allegation is not an indictment. Nor can it be treated as such by any ethical person living in a democratic society supposedly based on the rule of law. “

    • b.e.g.

      Proyectomas, thank you, thank you, thank you. I have been arguing this same thread for days and was unable to state it as well as you have here. Again, thank you. Yes, these young journalists are quick to PC without regard to the consequences. Other young readers read this stuff and regard it as truth. I was most upset by a couple of commenters comparing Affleck’s case with a case of gang rape, saying that one white guy won an Oscar while the other guy, black, his career was ruined. I was so upset by this comparison that I couldn’t write clearly and succinctly on this subject. These same folks were not only dropping the race card, but ridiculing and mocking any person, particularly men, that went against the grain.

  • Rose Thompson

    Wow…just wow. Bill Cosby, Cee-Lo Green, Michael Jackson, Terrence Howard, Kobe Bryant, Chris Brown, Mike Tyson, Tupac, Jim Brown, Joseph Simmons, etc. Need I go on? Apparently, this issue is not unlike most in this country, people will see what they WANT TO SEE! Not how it ACTUALLY IS! Tell me again how it is that white men are those capable of engaging in lewd and reprehensible acts while continuing a successful and without consequence career? The simple fact is….white OR black…people in this country are INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY! But, apparently even after being found guilty (Tyson and Brown, for example) there are people in this country who are willing to look the other way if it means that they will receive something for doing so…entertainment, enjoyment, etc. if you are still unable of recognizing this truth, you may just be a hypocrite!

  • rosie1843

    You’re writing this article . . . now?

  • temalinet

    This is how the entertainment industry is. As long as audiences are being entertained, they don’t want to deal with “heavy” topics or even the “heavy” truth. Look at the movie Don’s Plum, which Leo’s lawyers never allowed to be released because of his impending stardom in the 90s. You can dl it and you get any idea of what all these skinny white boys think like and the yes men around them that never correct it. Their actions 20 years later corroborate it’s the same ol, same ol. The amount of YES people in LA that work publicity for credible artists and do their best to justify constant sexual assault, intimidation, casting couch acts for the most reputable actresses (still) is insane. Joauqin and Affleck just put the NY flat where a few of their assaults were committed on the market (they are co owners), and I was told to feel sympathy because life is “different when you’re famous”. It really isn’t, these guys know what they’re doing and still do it, but ultimately never pay the price because audiences want to be entertained.

    Of course, say 1 thing anti-semitic and you won’t get any work for a min of 5 years.

  • june teu

    It’s actually hideous that he was awarded an oscar.

  • Daisy Arevalo

    This will never stop being one of my favorite pieces of writing. I reread this every so often. The words are just so spot on.