The headline chez Kurtz (at Fox News) is: "Young Mariel Hemingway had to rebuff Woody Allen’s advances."
Is that fair? I know it's fun to kick Woody Allen around, but "rebuff... advances" creates a picture of him groping her. And "Young Mariel Hemingway" suggests an underage female (like the character Hemingway played in "Manhattan"). But it was a powerful and not-all-that-old movie star inviting an adult female into an old-school romantic adventure. I mean — it's a romance cliché! — Paris.
Yeah, older men like younger women and trips to Paris are tempting. It may be a little hard to say no, but I can't believe there was that much scheming and trapping going on here, because how smart do you have to be — and I hear Woody's a genius — to figure out that you get the young lady to isolate herself with you in Paris by saying "Of course, you'll have your own room, and it will be a beautiful room in this charming hotel, blah blah blah. I would simply love to show you Paris, blah blah blah, museums... restaurants... the Seine blah, blah, blah"" You figure out how to lure her into your room after you're there.
I think he hadn't thought it through too well, and when she confronted him abruptly...
Hemingway woke up in the middle of the night “with the certain knowledge that I was an idiot. No one was going to get their own room. His plan, such as it was, involved being with me.” She shook him awake in the guest room and demanded:... it disturbed him. He fumbled for his glasses. Yes, I am an ugly old man with glasses, what would this beautiful girl want with me?
“I’m not going to get my own room, am I?” As Allen fumbled for his glasses, Hemingway informed him: “I can’t go to Paris with you.”
She wants her own room but she entered his room while he was sleeping and shook him awake. Why would you wake someone up in the middle of the night to make a declaration like that? Why can't you just make a plan to decline politely the next day? Why the drama? What did Woody do wrong? We're told "Hemingway had to rebuff Woody." She just had to... there, in the middle of the night, while he was sleeping.
CORRECTION: The last paragraph of this post originally read:
She wants her own room but she entered his room while he was sleeping. She shook him awake and — as Kurtz puts it — "demanded: 'I can’t go to Paris with you.'" How is "I can’t go to Paris with you" a demand? It's a declaration. Why would you wake someone up in the middle of the night to make a declaration? Why can't you just make a plan to decline politely the next day? Why the drama? What did Woody do wrong? We're told "Hemingway had to rebuff Woody." She just had to... there, in the middle of the night, while he was sleeping.The observations about the use of the word "demand" were based on what I believed was an accurate cut and paste that originally appeared (and is now replaced) in the blocked quote just before the last paragraph:
Hemingway woke up in the middle of the night “with the certain knowledge that I was an idiot. No one was going to get their own room. His plan, such as it was, involved being with me.” She shook him awake in the guest room and demanded: "I can’t go to Paris with you."I can't retrieve the original page from which I cut and pasted, but my practice is to use an ellipsis where words are removed. I might have failed to follow that practice in this case, and so I've rewritten the end of the post.
पोस्ट्स
८८ टिप्पण्या:
An obsession w/ youth of late, by the aging blogger.
Woody Allen has made movies with Scarlett Johannson.
I just thought that I would point that out.
I am Laslo.
Did the article change? It says she demanded "I'm not going to get my own room, am I?", but informed him "I can't go to Paris with you."
You don't understand. He made her an offer, she turned it down. That makes her a victim in the War on Women. Get with the program!
While we're asking deep questions, I'd like to know why Don Draper asked Midge to go to Paris with him knowing full well that she's newly in love with another guy who's perfect for her.
Tough to reconcile that with his immovable disdain for his scheming father.
Guess I'll just have to keep mulling it over until I figure it out.
"I think he hadn't thought it through too well"
Reaallly . . . .
"Yes, I am an ugly old man with glasses, what would this beautiful girl want with me?"
Fame, fortune, “I want you to enjoy me, my wry sense of humor and astonishing sexual technique”?
"She just had to... there, in the middle of the night, while he was sleeping."
1. A teenager and 2. a dramatic actress 3. just realized she's an idiot. So why not?
Woody Allen is creepy.
He probably thought she was fun. If the reverse is true too, they can have fun.
He's not having trouble finding vaginas. He wants the girl.
"Did the article change? It says she demanded "I'm not going to get my own room, am I?", but informed him "I can't go to Paris with you.""
I assure you I cut and pasted. So it looks like they did change it!
It now says: "Hemingway woke up in the middle of the night 'with the certain knowledge that I was an idiot. No one was going to get their own room. His plan, such as it was, involved being with me.' She shook him awake in the guest room and demanded: 'I’m not going to get my own room, am I?' As Allen fumbled for his glasses, Hemingway informed him: 'I can’t go to Paris with you.'"
I cut and pasted: "Hemingway woke up in the middle of the night 'with the certain knowledge that I was an idiot. No one was going to get their own room. His plan, such as it was, involved being with me.' She shook him awake in the guest room and demanded: 'I can’t go to Paris with you.'"
Kicking Woody Allen was fun for a while; it's not really much fun anymore.
I bet Woody Allen would spring for 'Scarlett Johannson Vagina Surgery' for Soon- Yi. If he hasn't already.
I am Laslo.
"Kicking Woody Allen was fun for a while; it's not really much fun anymore."
My point is: It's easy. It's what everyone else is already doing.
If Woody did something bad, she should have said so somewhere in the 30+ years since this event, and not now, not after he's been piled on and not when she has a book to sell.
He featured her in an excellent movie that turns out to have been the role of her lifetime. He did nothing more -- even in her own account -- than invite her on a trip to Paris without specifying what his secret hopes were. And she can't resist turning it into something that looks (to the casual eye) like another piece in the pattern Woody stands accused of.
That's quite awful.
"Fun" is sarcastic.
So Mariel Hemingway had nobody in her life to inform her that older men don't offer to take beautiful young women to Paris without at least the hope of having sex with them?
She had to figure that out for herself?
When we're dealing with legal adults, I really don't see the relevance of their respective ages. A 40 year old could have the maturity of a teenager, and vice versa--it really should have to do with respective states of mind or relative power between the two.
Was the creepy part of the Clinton-Lewinsky saga the age difference? Or was it the fact that he was president and she was one of his interns?
I am mildly disappointed that Althouse didn't go into an excursion on the word 'rebuff'. Word always strikes me as odd.
The scantily clad lady rebuffed the man's advances.
I am Laslo.
If every woman who was once beautiful listed every advance she'd ever declined as though each were a great insult... oh my! This is silly. How many other men made plays for her that she rebuffed? I'm guessing lots and lots. But no one is writing about them. ("Beautiful Woman Turns Down Man!" You don't say?)
So yes, I also think this is obviously about trying to kick Woody Allen around. Lame.
How does the original include the reference to him getting his glasses? You quote it as:
When he — as Howard Kurtz puts it — "fumbled for his glasses," she announced: "I can’t go to Paris with you."
In your quotes, you show "I can't go to Paris with you" as coming both before and after him fumbling for his glasses.
"not now, not after he's been piled on and not when she has a book to sell."
She is now in the female equivalence of where Woody was when he (supposedly) propositioned her. To put it bluntly, she is a aging has been with a book to sell.
Sort of like Woody was then, except for the has been part.
40+ men making passes at 18 year old girls is at least unseemly.
I don't know what passes for social standards among show business types, but this sort of thing would at least raise eyebrows anywhere else.
Just because something is legal doesn't make it appropriate.
Woody Allen deserves credit for being romantic while Bill Cosby deserves credit for being efficient.
Perhaps she thought he was concerned that she had not yet visited the Louvre or Versailles and wanted to correct such serious decencies in her education.
What I'm saying here is that I don't buy her version of the event.
Woody Allen would not have been the first old guy to proposition Muriel Hemingway. At eighteen she knew what he was up to the moment he suggested the trip.
Which is not to say that relating anecdotes of this sort is not itself unseemly. Some things are best forgotten. Some secrets should go to the grave with the bearer.
In a fit of hysteria, she bursts into his bedroom in the middle of the night, yet now insists she is the victim. Woody should have read her the Fourth Amendment.
" she has a book to sell."
Asked and answered.
Computer dating sites are taking all of the work out of seduction. But it's cheaper than a trip to Paris and a better selection.
Woody is so misunderstood. He wants to give young teens a gift. How often do you get screwed by a genius ?
Some experience with beautiful women tells me that they can indeed be remarkably isolated and naive. They are often treated by (most of) their suitors with enhanced respect and care, I suppose from some combination of awe and excessive fear of flushing the game. The tendency is for the hunter to regard a great prize, as they are, as requiring a careful and deliberate approach. This is usually an error.
What did Woody do wrong?
He was one of those creepy old Hollywood directors-producers who demanded Hemingway on his "casting couch". In an in-group, things are understood without saying: "plausible deniability".
And 18 year old M didn't need a safe room with cuddly animals far far away from triggers from middle aged men? And not self infantizing at that. She basically told him to shove off and went on and made a good movie with the guy.
"He was one of those creepy old Hollywood directors-producers who demanded Hemingway on his "casting couch". In an in-group, things are understood without saying: "plausible deniability"."
She already had the part. Generally "casting couch" demands are made before filming begins. I'm not saying that he wasn't hoping for sex. But hoping and demanding are not the same thing.
Sex between an 18yo and a 40yo could be fun for both. I don't understand the concern about whether it is appropriate or not. I can see why parents or close friends might feel the need to judge whether he/she made a wise choice of partners but why anyone else cares is a mystery.
I did a correction and eliminated the material about the misuse of the word demand. I don't know if the article changed, but I can't verify that my cutting and pasting didn't go wrong.
"I am mildly disappointed that Althouse didn't go into an excursion on the word 'rebuff'. Word always strikes me as odd. The scantily clad lady rebuffed the man's advances."
Yeah, that's something that easily could have happened and almost did. If it weren't for that distraction over demand, maybe it would have.
"Rebuff" has that nuance of nudity. In the buff...
Yeah, Woody Allen would never hit on a teenager less than half his age. Hollywood romance ? Shucks, in Haiti he could have married her, and his daughter!
"In your quotes, you show "I can't go to Paris with you" as coming both before and after him fumbling for his glasses."
Exactly. Good observation. I saw that too along the way to doing my correction.
Also on the subject of glasses, the fumbling is presented as though it suggests Woody was caught short and embarrassed. But she'd just shaken him awake, and he needs glasses enough to have to get them on if someone wants to talk to him. The gesture is meaningless, including the "fumbling." You were just woken up, you want the glasses, and, sleepy and eyesight-impaired, you reach for them.
"Yeah, Woody Allen would never hit on a teenager less than half his age."
I'm not saying it wasn't a hit, just that it was an old-school, slow, romanticized approach, not something crude or grope-y.
And frankly, the story about Soon-Yi is similar. An artist involves you in posing for photography....
Are 18-year-olds too vulnerable to be approached by men in their 40s?
Maybe we should raise the age of consent some more.
Creepers gonna creep.
In fairness to Ms. Hemingway, is she the one singling out this particular passage in the book for emphasis and publicity?
Regardless of Mr. Allen's current notoriety, this was an interesting event in her life, and I suspect it was a real learning experience for her. If she chooses to write a book about her life, wouldn't it be dishonest to omit it?
And once it's in there, certainly some folks will, because of the scandals associated with Mr. Allen, will use that passage to attract attention to themselves or their publications.
What should the rule for polite conduct be? Older women writing memoirs should omit any tales of seduction (or attempts thereof), period?Or they should omit any tales that, in the current social/political climate, may be seen by some as "piling on"?
I mean, from reading the article, it doesn't seem like Ms. Hemingway went out of her way to emphasize Mr. Allen or this awkward proposition of his. To the contrary, it appears that a major theme of the book is the constant sexual advances she experienced as a young, attractive actress from men with power over her career. I don't think it would be fair to OMIT Mr. Allen, over all the others, simply because of his current issues.
Mr. Kurtz is the one who exercised editorial judgment to emphasize the Allen encounter in the introduction to the article, rather than the Bob Fosse encounter or the Robert DeNiro encounter (or probably others, I'm betting). So if anyone is to blame for "piling on" Mr. Allen, it is Mr. Kurtz.
Sex between an 18yo and a 40yo could be fun for both.
That is fantasy. It's a porno flick that constantly plays in your head.
Why should Mariel Heminway be criticized for telling this story?
With a name like "Woody" how could she refuse?
I am also not Laslo
Compared to the other Hollywood men she mentions in the article, Woody Allen comes off as the most restrained. He asked her to go to Paris. She barged into his room in the middle of the night to tell him she wasn't going. He left the next day. And those are the "advances" Howard Kurtz chooses to headline?
Not exactly the same thing as Bob Fosse chasing her around a couch expecting her to give him some, because that's what all his other leading ladies have done. And what about her nutty parents who had their little fingerprints all over her back from pushing her "lightly" to go to Paris with her director? What was their angle?
It all sounds like standard operating procedure for Hollywood, to me, with Woody Allen limping along dead last behind a pack of other, more accomplished wolves. But I guess she has a book to sell and Kurtz has an agenda he has to serve. What's new?
She is so immature, assuming of course it really happened. In Maureen O'Hara's book, "Tis herself" she describes an incident where John Ford wanted her to sleep with him while they were making "The Quiet Man." She turned him down and he was so distraught that he cancelled filming the next day.
There was a grownup and more gorgeous than Hemingway could ever imagine.
"In fairness to Ms. Hemingway, is she the one singling out this particular passage in the book for emphasis and publicity?"
Good question. Perhaps in the larger context of the book, we would see that she's making fun of herself and is genuinely affectionate toward the older man she just had to wake up in the middle of the night.
Men are monsters. All of them.
Gary Cooper and Grace Kelly. But Cooper was beautiful and did not wear glasses.
Her Grandfather was older when he hit on 19 year old Adriana Ivancich.
Men are hunters.
Hunting too has its etiquette.
Some prey is not suitable for the circumstances and the season.
Allen didn't become a creep until after the Soon-Yi fiasco. There's something comical and sad about this story. At one time, it could have been told in such a way that Woody looked endearing and quixotic. After the Soon Yi thing and the other allegations, it's difficult to view Woody's quest for love as anything but creepy.
I've found it to be a tremendous mitigation, when having sex with a woman young enough to be my granddaughter, to insist that she take the top.
The next thing we find out that it was night and Woody was LOOMING over her and raping her.
At least he wasn't as bad as Jimmy Page, who had affairs with a 13 year old girl, and kept her holed up in his hotel room for years so the authorities wouldnr find out.
Seems like Ann is waging a war on women by attacking Hemingway.
"Some Seppo" beat me to it, but I am neither Sepo nor Laslo.
Professor, how is she to be faulted even if she's not putting it in some type of humorous context? I don't see any sign that she's saying the incident was so traumatic the man should be arrested, or run out of town on a rail. She didn't say this one particular incident was deeply devastating to her.
You seem to be making the argument that a memoir-writer should not share stories involving others, if they would embarrass or reveal too much intimate detail about those others. That's not an outrageous argument, to be sure. A gentleman (and presumably a lady) never kisses and tells. But it would apply equally to the Fosse, DeNiro, and other stories in her book as well, not just Allen. And it would essentially prohibit women who were the target of industrial-level aggressive seduction techniques from ever talking about it, whether she welcomed the advances or not (not to say that Allen's was "aggressive" by itself, rather that the sum total of the attention paid to her by men with power over her career was aggressive).
You also suggested that perhaps she should have either said something at the time or not talked about it ever. But if she had said something at the time, would that have even made a mention in any trade journal in Hollywood or New York? At that time? No, very unlikely. And she would have been judged harshly for mentioning the story, and I suspect would have never gotten serious work in Hollywood again.
Further, given the lack of emphasis that (as best I can tell from Kurtz' article) she places on the Allen story as opposed to the others, the predominant theme of that portion of the book seems to be on the fairly standard industry practice. That Allen hit on her may not have been that huge a deal to her at the time (other than the shock of a young girl at being the target of such an attempt at seduction, learning not to take facially harmless invitations at face value). It's not newsworthy, in and of itself. But when you combine it with 4 or 5 or 6 other similar instances, it becomes part of a pattern, and the pattern is newsworthy.
Fortunately for Woody, they were not college students at the time.
She's gone to the Piper Laurie school of memoir writing for starlets.
Eighteen? Polanski already banged her at 15.
The only Hollywood memoirs worth reading are David Niven's two books, Bring on the Empty Horses and The Moon's a Balloon. That's because Niven was a good writer, and because he wasn't merely an actor. He was a soldier, an adventurer, a funny guy, and best friends with Errol Flynn. He lived a life in full and it all makes for very entertaining reading.
I find it odd that 18 year-olds are treated in the press as, essentially helpless children or full blown, responsible adults. Depends on the point of the story, one supposes.
"Professor, how is she to be faulted even if she's not putting it in some type of humorous context? I don't see any sign that she's saying the incident was so traumatic the man should be arrested, or run out of town on a rail. She didn't say this one particular incident was deeply devastating to her."
I'm mostly faulting the headline writer and Kurtz for extracting this nugget (though probably flogging this nugget was in the PR for the book).
I'd fault her a little for presenting Allen in a negative light now, taking advantage of an obvious and easy target. Why is an adult woman taking shots at a man who, long ago, had sexual designs on her if he never did anything but try to woo her and accepted no as the answer?
I'm not seeing the whole context. Does it fit sexual harassment in the workplace? She was very young, and perhaps hired to get her into the pool of potential conquests.
So, did she end up going to Paris with Billy, Biff, and Scooter?
I'm with PathMV here. Context does matter to tell us whether or not she is opportunistically piling on Woody Allen by talking about this story. But why on earth would she have to demonstrate that she is "genuinely affectionate" for him in order to get a pass? If the anecdote fits a series that are presented to make a point then she shouldn't be faulted for including it, no matter what her personal feelings for him might be.
I'm not into reading Hollywood memoirs, and I understand the ethos of not "kissing and telling", but I really see some net good in actresses letting the younger generation know that celebrity comes with this price. The more that the naive kids can be educated, the better in my opinion- and regardless of other endearing qualities or talents, if the men behave dishonorably then they don't deserve an honor code of secrecy.
I watched her documentary on her family, "Running from Crazy," a few months ago. It's not the best ever, but it was interesting as it included a lot of family footage when Margeux had the idea of putting together a documentary herself. The premise of Mariel's movie is due to the amount of mental illness, alcoholism and abuse in the family, she thought it might be inevitable that she would herself be a victim. The saddest case is her sister Muffet. Mariel's eating disorders are classic case of child from a chaotic alcoholic home trying to control her out of control world.
What's interesting is that she seems to think she has overcome so much, but her current partner seems like a controlling jerk who will probably get them killed in some high speed road rage incident. A writer from the NYT who spent time with them said as much for an article on the film and there is an incident in the movie. Mariel doesn't see him for what he is and that he is another version of an eating disorder.
Michael K:
If I had been on the Quiet Man shoot with Maureen O'Hara I would have made a pass at her too. I mean, Maureen O'Hara, for gosh sakes! Any red-blooded man would do the same, or at least think about doing it.
And, anyway, how old must a man be from him to be disqualified from making a pass at a pretty girl?
Both David Niven books are a great read, Roughcoat. Thanks for reminding me of them.
What's the point of being a Hollywood big shot if you don't get the spoils of Hollywood big shottery?
I just read the article. I wonder if the title of her memoir isn't an allusion to The Sun Also Rises. It doesn't sound like she's anywhere near as fast and loose and self serving with the facts of her life as Ernest was with his.....The comments here are unkind. She did manage to overcome a wretched childhood, achieve movie stardom, and find sufficient meaning in barren experiences to write a memoir concerning them. If she has sour memories about Woody, she's entitled to them. She's a Hemingway, but not the Hemingway. They say the truth is a lie that everyone believes. A myth is a lie that everyone venerates. Ernest was a myth maker. She's a story teller.
He: "Is there any chance that you'd have sex with me?"
She: "I'd say the odds are 10 billion to one against it."
He: "So, there IS a chance!"
Explains a lot right there.
Beth B:
Quite welcome. Come to think, I'm going to read them again. What a guy he was. He loved America too. After resigning his commission in the British Army, and purely on a lark, he takes ship to the States and spends a goodly portion of his life in the 1930s knocking around New York City and Atlantic City as a rodeo promoter, among other things. Wanders over to Bermuda and Cuba. Drifts out to Hollywood where he becomes, almost by accident, an actor. Then, when WW2 breaks out, he re-ups in the army and serves for the duration, sees combat, etc. And his stories of the wild times he had with Flynn--wowza! Highly recommended.
The way these moments from her memoir are portrayed have more to do with Kurtz than with Hemingway.
Yeah, you are not seeing the whole context. You might want to read the book or see the doc about her family mentioned above rather than judging her reactions to events when she was 18 based on a Kurtz article or what her publisher's PR are pushing to get attention. From this article, you don't understand that perhaps these experiences in the real world as a young adult (and as someone from her background) may have lead her to her first marriage (was he much older? I don't remember).
Perhaps her rudely awakening of Woody means something in context rather than it's just "someone who used to be beautiful" (really?) talking about famous men who hit on her.
Besides the hollowed halls of elite academia, the movie industry (and the entertainment industry in general), must be the most 'effed up places in western society.
It's been a while since I have seen Manhattan, but Woody plays Isaac who is dating Tracy, a 17 year old high school student. http://youtu.be/wKi2yQt5kcc
There is a reason why they call him "Woody".
This is a red letter day; I'm agreeing with ARM.
Yes, I get that Woody Allen, who married a 16 year old as his first wife (he was 19), reputedly had an affair with 17 year old high school student, boinked his stepdaughter (who was technically not his stepdaughter, just the sister of his son) is too easy a target. But, yeech.
Yes, I also get that Mariel is actually sort of bragging in her memoirs. "Look at all of these rich and famous guys who wanted to boink me and I got to turn them all down." That's pretty creepy too. At least Mariel didn't get raped, unlike poor "Jackie" in Charlottesville.
Oh, wait.
Professor, I guess my confusion with your position is that you read this as her "taking shots" at Allen. Do you read it that way because of the particular verbs and adjectives she chose to use in describing the account? Or the fact that she mentions the incident at all.
As I go back and reread Kurtz' article (and at this point, I'm almost curious enough to read the book), I see that she mentions her parents, and how they "lightly encouraged" her to go to Paris with him, rather than "putting their foot down," as she hoped they would. That seems a very revealing, essential detail to a memoir such as this, and you can't tell that part of the story without telling about the entire incident with Allen.
I'm having trouble parsing the quotes in Kurtz' piece. At points where it seems to be quoting the book, there are references to Hemingway in the 3rd person.
Take the language which caught your eye (and was subsequently changed), regarding the word "demanded," and the details of "fumbling" with his glasses. The article says:
She shook him awake in the guest room and demanded: "I'm not going to get my own room, am I?" As Allen fumbled for his glasses, Hemingway informed him: "I can't go to Paris with you."
Neither the "demanded" nor the "fumbled" are in quotes. So presumably the specific phraseology there is Kurtz'. I think we would all reasonably expect that in this context, Kurtz has likely condensed some longer passage or more tightly worded the phrasing of a couple of points in order to meet his own space limitations and narrative needs. So maybe the book says "I watched as he fumbled with his glasses for a moment, nervous about what his reaction may be. And then I told him: I can't go to Paris with you." And Kurtz cuts that down to "as he fumbled with his glasses, Hemingway informed him:"
But we can't be sure if Kurtz is following that convention. If the particular adjectives and verbs are what make you see this as an attack of some sort, then I think it would be fairer to verify what words Hemingway herself used.
I do agree with you that Kurtz bears some blame here for sensationalism and kicking a guy when he's down.
You know, the more I read about this book, the more I'm inclined to read it. A large portion of it seems to be about the subtle and not so subtle ways that parents can really do a number on their kids. As she puts it:
Society's narrow focus on sexual abuse of children "obscures and trivializes the hundreds of other ways that a family can betray a child, most of which are far more nuanced and complex, more interwoven into everyday life..."
There's some deep thought there. There may be a lot of value in the discussions of the subtleties of mental illness.
She shook his Woody awake? Did I read that correct?! I need to fumble for my glasses...
Ann Althouse said...If Woody did something bad, she should have said so somewhere in the 30+ years since this event, and not now, not after he's been piled on and not when she has a book to sell.
That's a dangerous sentiment to express, Prof. Althouse; "she should have said so somewhere in the...years since this event" would get the protestors at your door in a heartbeat in most other contexts (think Cosby defense, etc).
Kicking Woody will always be fun, because he so frequently and richly deserves it.
How is a film maker supposed to research his art?
I expect him to be on the lookout for material all the time.
Kinda creepy anyway. I stopped dancing at clubs when I noticed how much older I was than the girls I wanted to dance with. It takes a lot of money to not be a dirty old man.
Hoodlum doodlum wrote:
Prof. Althouse; "she should have said so somewhere in the...years since this event" would get the protestors at your door in a heartbeat in most other contexts (think Cosby defense, etc).
some might have a problem with a lot of the Cosby women coming forward NOW, sometimes decades after the incident.
I am re-watching the Running from Crazy movie on Netflix to refresh my memory. She watched her father come into the bedroom and have a sexual experiences (she doesn't get graphic) with her sisters. After that, from 8-16 she slept in her mothers bed, which is why she thinks she doesn't remember it happening to her, but she knows that's why she slept with her mother.
She says that's the reason she didn't have sex with anyone. She was messed up about it and married at 23 to a man 12 years older because he said he would protect her from everything. Her mom didn't like that he was 35 and not good looking.
You figure out how to lure her into your room after you're there.
Go Althouse! Advising on how to pull a Cosby.
It's one thing to be a perp's lawyer. It's another to advise them on how to go about perpetratin'.
I think Cosby surpasses Allen in god awful behavior by several orders of magnitude, but they're both pretty bad. And both men still have their defenders, although my guess is that there's not much overlap between the two camps. The Cosby people think Allen is guilty and vice versa......The record shows that those Hollywood stars who are most interested in the poor and downtrodden are the most inclined to use the power imbalances of their position in order to get laid. If girls can be slut shamed, so should guys be creep shamed. Mariel's stories have the ring of truth, and good for her for telling them......Some time back I knew a girl who was a stewardess for Pan-Am. Marlon Brando used to fly regularly on the NY-LA runs. He was a holy terror. I don't suppose Marlon Brando had to go to much trouble to get a girl into bed, but, the point is, he didn't go to any. He would put his hand up their dress and proposition them in the bluntest possible way. I suppose it worked occasionally and there was an economy effort, but most of the girls felt offended. He was engaging in droit du movie star. Maybe Marlon Brando should have gotten some of the harsh press directed at, say, Ken Starr.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा