I never heard anything too specific about Harvey Weinstein.
I just heard that he was a bully. I just heard that he was one of those people who would use whatever leverage he could muster to bend others to his will. Some people hated him, but some people admired him. And some of the people who hated him admired him too, at least a little bit, for being able to so nakedly and relentlessly pursue his self-interest. I think a lot of people wished they could be more like him.
I wasn't shocked by these revelations of sexual inappropriateness, just a little at the ferocity of the blowback. Because this is nothing new. Women--and some men--have had to put up with this sort of criminally boorish behavior since before we had words to describe it. Some people would even argue it's in our nature to use whatever hammers our advantages provide us.
I don't think that's right; I think there's a certain pathology to bullies, that their behavior generally has roots in some deep unhappiness. We get hurt early, and we use that hurt as fuel. Some people are driven to achieve positions of power because they want and on some level need to exert that power. But these are wounded, stunted people. Not everyone. Not most of us.
Still, I'm ashamed to say I assumed it was inevitable that some men in Weinstein's position would behave badly. I'm ashamed to admit I just assumed that's how the world works. We've all heard about casting couches; we've all suspected some careers were owed to sexual favors. We're not children, we understand the libertine nature of Hollywood culture.
But it's not just Hollywood. In the 1970s and '80s I heard about this sort of thing a lot in academia. Jerry Sandusky operated with impunity for years. The Catholic Church covered for pedophiles who used their authority to indulge desire. When every woman, whether she's willing to share it or not, has a story about being propositioned and bullied, maybe we ought to think about how that happens.
Because, like I said--like a lot of men protest--we aren't all like that.
But maybe we aren't as brave as we need to be either. Maybe we ought to call bullies out whenever they present themselves. Maybe we ought to always look out for the vulnerable and provide them with genuine safety. Maybe we ought to do something.
That's not always easy. Every relationship has its inequities and I don't like bright line rules. I've known professors who've married their students and enjoyed remarkably rich, collaborative lives. Some very nice people sleep around a lot. One size does not fit all.
Back in the late 1980s, when I used to go to conventions of alternative journalists, I'd often get asked why the newspaper I worked for--Spectrum Weekly--didn't investigate the open secret that was Bill Clinton's love life. I had a ready answer.
First, I didn't like what had happened to Gary Hart in 1987; when the Miami Herald exposed his affair with Donna Rice the paper effectively derailed his presidential ambitions. I thought--and still believe--that even public people are entitled to a sphere of privacy. So I didn't care about any extra-marital affairs Clinton might or might not have conducted so long as he wasn't abusing his office. Charismatic, powerful people are attractive, and other people's marriages are strange compacts I've no business trying to deconstruct.
Besides, at that point, there was no suggestion that any of Clinton's rumored affairs had been anything but consensual transactions between adults. I don't know what happened but don't believe Clinton broke the law or abused anyone in his pursuit of feminine companionship.
The Monica Lewinsky episode was different, for in that case it was obvious the president of the United States had significant power over the White House intern. He could have kick-started her career; he could have ruined her. I don't care if she set out to seduce him. I didn't--and still don't--think he should have been impeached for lying about a sexual encounter, but he should have resigned out of shame. He violated a trust, he took advantage of a young woman for whom he should have been looking out.
Clinton should have been an adult. And I don't think he'd argue that.
Look, like Weinstein, I grew up in the '60s and '70s, but I still think character ought to matter. And while we're all susceptible to screwing up, we ought to expect to pay a price for our mistakes. And if we are somehow granted grace we ought to humbly strive to do better, not take it as evidence of our entitlement.
That said, a lot of people are grateful for a chance to unload on Harvey Weinstein because he's a guy they hate for reasons that were given bulletproof cover by these unsurprising recent revelations. We all knew Harvey was a pig, even if we never met the guy.
I'm not going to make the mistake of saying that what happened to Weinstein is "sad." It's not. Maybe it's a kind of vigilante justice I'm not completely comfortable with, but it's justice nevertheless. Sure, some of the people condemning Weinstein are hypocrites. Some were probably enablers.
Not everyone. Not most of us.
But we all need to do better.
pmartin@arkansasonline.com
Read more at
www.blooddirtangels.com
Editorial on 10/22/2017