Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

#MeToo movement rocked by revelation that Asia Argento settled sexual abuse claims against her

#MeToo movement rocked by revelation that Asia Argento settled sexual abuse claims against her

Rose McGowan reaction: “My heart is broken.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muvdUyqXh9s

The New York Times dropped a bombshell on Monday that revealed actress and director Asia Argento, one of the first females to accuse Harvey Weinstein of sexual assault, paid off a man who accused her of sexual abuse. From the Times:

But in the months that followed her revelations about Mr. Weinstein last October, Ms. Argento quietly arranged to pay $380,000 to her own accuser: Jimmy Bennett, a young actor and rock musician who said she had sexually assaulted him in a California hotel room years earlier, when he was only two months past his 17th birthday. She was 37. The age of consent in California is 18.

That claim and the subsequent arrangement for payments are laid out in documents between lawyers for Ms. Argento and Mr. Bennett, a former child actor who once played her son in a movie.

The documents, which were sent to The New York Times through encrypted email by an unidentified party, include a selfie dated May 9, 2013, of the two lying in bed. As part of the agreement, Mr. Bennett, who is now 22, gave the photograph and its copyright to Ms. Argento, now 42. Three people familiar with the case said the documents were authentic.

The New York Times reached out to Argento’s lawyer Carrie Goldberg, but she did not reply to the emails and her office told the publication she “would not be available to discuss this article.

Goldberg sent a letter after the payment to Bennett:

In an April letter addressed to Ms. Argento confirming the final details of the deal and setting out a schedule of payments, Ms. Goldberg characterized the money as “helping Mr. Bennett.”

“We hope nothing like this ever happens to you again,” Ms. Goldberg wrote. “You are a powerful and inspiring creator and it is a miserable condition of life that you live among shitty individuals who’ve preyed on both your strengths and your weaknesses.”

The Times wrote that the incident “was so traumatic that it hindered Mr. Bennett’s work and income and threatened his mental health, according to a notice of intent to sue that his lawyer sent in November to Richard Hofstetter, Mr. Bourdain’s longtime lawyer, who was also representing Ms. Argento at the time.” The Times continued:

Mr. Bennett’s notice of intent asked for $3.5 million in damages for the intentional infliction of emotional distress, lost wages, assault and battery. Mr. Bennett made more than $2.7 million in the five years before the 2013 meeting with Ms. Argento, but his income has since dropped to an average of $60,000 a year, which he attributes to the trauma that followed the sexual encounter with Ms. Argento, his lawyer wrote.

In October, a month before Mr. Bennett sent his demand for money, The New Yorker published an article by Ronan Farrow that included Ms. Argento among 13 women who accused Mr. Weinstein of harassment and rape.

Argento’s payoff has caused her allies in the #MeToo movement to put some distance between themselves, including leader Rose McGowan. From The Hollywood Reporter:

Asia Argento’s former ally Rose McGowan has publicly distanced herself from the Italian director and actress after a report in the New York Times said that Argento paid off her own sexual assault accuser.

Both Argento and McGowan have been two of the most outspoken critics of Harvey Weinsten after coming forward as victims of the disgraced Hollywood producer last fall.

McGowan tweeted: “I got to know Asia Argento ten months ago. Our commonality is the shared pain of being assaulted by Harvey Weinstein. My heart is broken. I will continue my work on behalf of victims everywhere.”

According to photographs, McGowan first met Argento in March of 2003 and they grew closer last year over their shared experiences in coming out as the first victims of Weinstein.

But it looks like the bombshell won’t stop Argento from quitting the #MeToo movement. At the Cannes festival, Argento described the festival as Weinstein’s “hunting ground” in her speech. From NBC News:

“In 1997, I was raped by Harvey Weinstein here at Cannes. I was 21 years old,” Argento said while presenting onstage during the festival’s closing ceremony on Saturday in France.

“This festival was his hunting ground,” she said.

Argento then predicted that Weinstein “will never be welcomed here ever again.”

“He will live in disgrace, shunned by a film community that once embraced him and covered up for his crimes,” she said.

Despite the removal of Weinstein, Argento insisted the audience contains more predators:

“And even tonight, sitting among you, there are those who still have to be held accountable for their conduct against women, for behavior that does not belong in this industry, does not belong in any industry or work place,” she said.

“You know who you are, but most importantly — we know who you are and we’re not going to allow you to get away with it any longer,” she said, drawing applause from the crowd.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

And… Wait for it.. now the grip from the set of Charmed will step forward.

Hey, popcorn is still free all wrek, ladies and gents. No need to push.

I shouldn’t be so glib. This really does hurt the movement, and at the expense of innocents.

When I was trying to report a pedophile in the SCA (Society for Creative Anachronism), one of the reasons I had trouble getting an audience with leadership was because it was common practice for members engaged in petty political feuds to accuse each other of child abuse.

The 6 girls (that we knew of) refused to come forward because people they trusted refused to believe them.

It’s known as the 2nd rape. I experienced it second-hand and it’s soul crushing. Side effects are: loss of faith in authority, depression, substance abuse and then suicide.

“…paid off another man she accused of sexually assaulting her.”

Mary,

Can you check the wording here?

    C. Lashown in reply to willow. | August 20, 2018 at 4:49 pm

    hmmm….as I recall, “Neatsfoot oil” is really good to restore the suppleness of a good baseball glove and if mixed with beeswax can be used for moisture proofing a good pair of boots.

caseoftheblues | August 20, 2018 at 9:27 am

The sad truth is it’s not really a bombshell…it is the normal hypocrisy and foundation of lies and virtue signaling that the left operates from. Whatever they accuse others of is what they themselves engage in… we’ve seen it over and over.

“…paid off another man she accused of sexually assaulting her.”

This must be a typo of some sort.

Also:

the bombshell won’t stop Argento from quitting the #MeToo movement.

“Quitting” must also be a mistake, though I’m not sure which word was intended.

    C. Lashown in reply to Milhouse. | August 20, 2018 at 4:53 pm

    re: ““Quitting” must also be a mistake, though I’m not sure which word was intended.”

    Try inserting the word “Queefing”, that should work out well.

Wait, hypocrisy and disingenuity coming from the left? Didn’t see that one coming…

theduchessofkitty | August 20, 2018 at 11:18 am

I wonder if discovering this was one reason for that chef, what’s his name, to take his own life. Poor guy.

The whole #MeToo thing is a sham and it’s hurting all the real rape victims.
Call me antiquated, but I think there’s a distinction to be made between forced or violent rape and the so called statutory rape of a consenting young adult. There is also a distinction to make for regret-after -the-fact “(not)rape” and for the quid-pro-quo kind “(not)rape” of which there may be many cases in the Weinstein affair.
I was sexually active at 17, and so were many, probably most, of the people I knew at the time. If given the chance to spend some time with some thirty something “cougar”, I would have taken it in a heart beat, and 100% of my male friends at the time would have done the same. Make it a (somewhat)famous actress and it’s a catch for the books.
I don’t know if this lady sexually assaulted the young man or not, but I am inclined to believe she did not. Whether he was mature enough to consent when it happened, that would be a thing to look into.
I am also inclined to believe that some of the Weinstein accusers sold their bodies for fame and fortune. I will not pass judgement on it if they were consenting adults. I do pass judgement though, on the hypocrisy and selfishness of calling themselves “victims” now that their wallets are full.

And then there’s the fact that for these people, #MeToo is just another #Me thing.

    daniel_ream in reply to Exiliado. | August 20, 2018 at 11:57 am

    Ah, yes. The “teenage boys are always horny so they can’t be raped” bollocks.

    You clearly never did have a shot with a predatory cougar when you were 17, nor did any of your friends, or you wouldn’t be so flippant about the aftereffects.

    Young males sexually abused by older women suffer significant problems in their lives as a result, usually revolving around trust issues, even if they enjoyed the encounter and remember it fondly.

    OTOH, if he’s a white male, he’s subhuman and anything can be done to him, per Leftist Orthodoxy.

      Exiliado in reply to Fen. | August 20, 2018 at 2:01 pm

      Any person who is “sexually abused” can be expected to end up having issues. The point is that not all relationships with an older person are necessarily “abuse”.
      Little piece of “trivia”: Age of consent in most states is 16.

        Exiliado…

        The LI post left out what I think could be an important detail of this saga…

        These two didn’t just meet when he was 17….
        The young man has known Ms Argento since he was 7 yrs old…they were in a movie together and played….mother and son.

        Apparently, Bennett and Argento had kept in touch over the years and often referred to each other as mother and son.

        Now of course, she is not really his mom….but still…having sex with someone you’d been calling “mom” for ten years could be some what…traumatic or freaky or just too weird!!!

          Exiliado in reply to tgrondo. | August 21, 2018 at 11:55 am

          Yes, but weird is just that, weird. It is not abuse or assault.
          The real question would be: Was the sex consensual?

          Notice that he has a claim because it happened in California, where the age of consent is 18, while in most states the age of consent is 16. (Not saying that I agree with that, just pointing out the facts.)
          And talking about ‘weird’, it would also be or feel weird to extort $380,000.00 out of somebody you’ve been calling “Mom” for ten years. I think that’s the real motivation here.

Do you think this has been timed to allow the odious Keith Ellison to be let off the abuse hook? If the “Me Too” movement can be damaged then he will benefit from the everybody does it meme. I am not sure if the video exists but if it ever makes it to the net I don’t believe he will survive.

Perhaps the progs will decide that sexual assault requires “forced sex plus power” and since women don’t have power they can’t be guilty of sexual assault.

This would be consistent with their patently absurd viewpoint that racism requires “prejudice plus power.”

OleDirtyBarrister | August 20, 2018 at 1:56 pm

Gee, I sure hope that wannabe rock star Jimmy Bennett is OK. I am sure that having sex with a young [but slightly older] woman was the most distant thing from his mind when he was 17 and aspiring to be a rock star. The horror! And she probably even paid for the hotel room and the drugs. He must have nightmares about the experience, especially since he has not become a known rock star and does not have the number of groupies he imagined he would have some day.

I am certain that Bennett’s lawsuit was based on the trauma of fornicating with an older woman and not just a financial shakedown.

Issues with pedophelia and molestation aside – Asia Argento can even tie me down if she want to.

Just saying…

This 17 year old was NO LITTLE KID. Comments above about “predatory cougars” – can’t decide if I want to laugh or throw up.

Makes we want to go to Cali (if it wasn’t one large outdoor insane asylum) and demand this kids man-card back.

I also have SERIOUS DOUBTS this kids made $3 Mil in the years preceding his (alleged) abuse.

Same with actresses whining about having to “put out” to get their start in the industry. This was SOP, since William Kennedy Laurie Dickson, a Scottish inventor and employee of Thomas Edison, designed the Kinetograph Camera.

Between molesting priests, #metoo, and Minor Attracted Persons (wanting to be mainstreamed), I’m thinking that Radical Islam might have a few decent ideas going on (their own dogmatic pedophelia aside)…

    Arminius in reply to RSConsulting. | August 21, 2018 at 3:54 am

    “…Between molesting priests, #metoo, and Minor Attracted Persons (wanting to be mainstreamed), I’m thinking that Radical Islam might have a few decent ideas going on (their own dogmatic pedophelia aside)…”

    I don’t know if you’re attempting to be sarcastic, but Islam has never had a good idea, particularly when it comes to sexual relations.

    Surah 2:223

    “Your wives are a place of sowing of seed for you, so come to your place of cultivation however you wish and put forth [righteousness] for yourselves. And fear Allah and know that you will meet Him. And give good tidings to the believers.”

    We wouldn’t have a #MeToo movement simply because there is no such thing as having to get consent from a woman before screwing her. So their would be no scandal, and no crime regarding Harvey Weinstein, if we had an Islamic legal system. A woman’s consent is not required. Hence there is no such crime as marital rape; does a farmer need to get the field’s permission before he plows it? Of course not; the idea that woman can give or withhold consent is as ridiculous in every school of Islamic jurisprudence as the idea an inanimate object like a plot of land can give or withhold consent from a farmer.

    In cases when a woman alleges rape in Islamic countries she is always guilty unless she has four male witnesses who actually witnessed penetration. Which never happens, so the woman is guilty of zina or unlawful sex normally translated as adultery which carries a death sentence. It’s illegal for a man and a woman to be alone together in a hotel room (anywhere, really) so wouldn’t Harvey Weinstein who is married also be guilty of zina and sentenced to death? No, he could admit the whole thing and get off with a few lashes. A man can have four wives, so in countries that adhere to Sharia law men routinely get away with this simply by claiming the woman promised to be his second wife then reneged.

    So if Harvey Weinstein raped Asia Argento (as she claims, and frankly I don’t think she didn’t know what Weinstein wanted in exchange for a part) in Cannes if France adopted Sharia he might be flogged at most but she’d be in prison awaiting execution. That’s what happens in Iran, Saudi Arabia, or Sudan. Or rather would happen if the woman was stupid enough to report it. Only Western women who go to places like Dubai for vacation or to work as expats are stupid enough to report it. Because they’ve been brought up as multiculturalists and have been taught all cultures are equal they know nothing about the culture they’re swimming in, because why bother since all cultures are basically the same, and therefore are stunned when it dawns on them just a tad too late as the judge is sentencing them to years in prison for adultery that they really should have tried to learn something about Islamic culture. And they would be further stunned to learn that this happened to them in Dubai because that emirate doesn’t strictly adhere to Sharia so even with the lengthy prison sentence they’re getting off lightly as far as the locals are concerned.

    So you’d never have a #MeToo movement no matter how many women powerful Saudi businessment raped, and don’t kid yourself that Islamic clerics aren’t molesting boys all over the Islamic world. Look up Bachi Bazi sometime. Or raping girls and women, although they generally wait until they marry them to do that. And under both Sunni and Shia Islam there is no minimum age limit to marry a girl. Men can enter into a marriage contract in both sects the day after the girl is born. Shia Islam does have a minimum age for consummating a marriage. She has to be 9 years old. That would be 9 years on the lunar calendar, so by our calendar she has to be 8 years and several months old. In Sunni Islam there is no minimum age limit for intercourse as long as the husband and father/guardian agree the girl can withstand intercourse. If they can’t agree then just like in Shia Islam the father/guardian has to hand the girl over to her husband when she is 9 lunar years old. And these time limits only apply to vaginal intercourse. The husband can pleasure himself with his “bride” even as an infant. Which is why Muslim men can pleasure themselves with boys as only sodomy is a sin.

    This is so weird I’m going to link to the masked Arab, an apostate from Shiism hence the need to hide his identity, to explain further about pedophilia in Islam. He goes to the authoritative Sunni and Shia sources in both English and Arabic to explain.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LE3QARjIZg

    “Paedophilia & child marriage in Islam”

    So you’ll never hear about a Islamic cleric pedophilia scandal because a lot of what those priests are accused of doing are legal under Sharia law. Which makes Islam entirely different from Christianity as these priests went against the expess teaching of Christ but Islamic clerics aren’t going against Allah and Muhammad when they do the exact same thing.

    These aren’t even Muhammad’s weirdest ideas about sex. There’s Nikah Mutah, or temporary marriage, and Nikah Halala, a type of marriage for making a woman legal (Halal) for an earlier husband to remarry.

    There’s not too much to say about Mutah (also called Misyar) marriage other than to observe it is simply prostitution with divine blessing. Muhammad (if he existed) permitted his companions out on military campaigns to go into towns and in exchange for something of value come to a mutual agreement with a woman to get “married” for a fixed period of time; an hour, three hours, three days, whatever. And at the end of the agreed time period he’d divorce her by saying “talak” (I divorce you) and they’d part ways. Sunnis will tell you that Abu Bakr abolished Nikah Muhtah but I have never come across any authentic source in which he does so nor have I met any Muslims who can point to any authentic source. Certainly Muhammad never abolished it. And since the Shia don’t recognized the authority of Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman, considering them usurpers, they say it has never been abolished. In any case they both widely practice as a form of sex tourism. They’ll go to Cairo, Indonesia, and more recently refugee camps in places like Jordan and indulge in “temporary marriage” with women who are willing to have sex with just about anybody in order to eat.

    Nikah Halala, or Halala marriage, is even harder to explain. If a man said the dreaded “triple talak” to his wife then they could not get back together until she had married another man, consummated the marriage, and then he divorced her. Then since this second husband had made her halal by having sex with her the previously divorced couple could get back together.

    I have no idea what this was meant to accomplish, other than to prove the early Muslims had some really weird ideas. So weird that Muslims will insist that Halala marriage has nothing to do with Islam. They are of course either lying in the case of Islamic scholars or pig ignorant about what Allah put in the Quran and Muhammad’s teachings about these things in the ahadith collections.

    Bidah, or innovation, is the second worst sin in Islam and Muslims are actively discouraged from studying the Quran on their own lest they form independent ideas about what it has to say. That’s innovation; in other words, heresy.

    The authority for Halala marriage can be found in both the Quran and the ahadith.

    Surah 2:230

    “And if he has divorced her [for the third time], then she is not lawful to him afterward until [after] she marries a husband other than him. And if the latter husband divorces her [or dies], there is no blame upon the woman and her former husband for returning to each other if they think that they can keep [within] the limits of Allah . These are the limits of Allah, which He makes clear to a people who know.”

    Sahih al Bukhari – Book of Dress – (23) Chapter: Green clothes

    ” Narrated `Ikrima:

    Rifa`a divorced his wife whereupon `Abdur Rahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. `Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by beating). It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah’s Messenger came, `Aisha said, “I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women. Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!” When `Abdur Rahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, “By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but he is impotent and is as useless to me as this,” holding and showing the fringe of her garment, `Abdur-Rahman said, “By Allah, O Allah’s Messenger! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient and wants to go back to Rifa`a.” Allah’s Messenger said, to her, “If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa`a unless `Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you.” Then the Prophet saw two boys with `Abdur- Rahman and asked (him), “Are these your sons?” On that `AbdurRahman said, “Yes.” The Prophet said, “You claim what you claim (i.e.. that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow,””

    This actually serves multiple purposes. Note that the divorced wife of Rifa’a and current wife of Abdur Rahman doesn’t have a name. Only Muhammad’s wives have names in the ahadith collections (and only Mary, the mother of Jesus has a name in the Quran). Note that modern Muslims insist that while wife beating is allowed in Islam (in fact it’s a duty) Muslims are only allowed t beat their wives “lightly.” Considering her bruises, Abdur Rahman did not beat her lightly and Muhammad had no problem with it. In fact, he essentially tells the woman she brought it on herself for lying and saying Abdur Rahman is impotent. But for our purposes at the moment this hadith and the above Quran verse show that Muslims are lying when they say Halala marriage has nothing to do with Islam. If it doesn’t, why is this hadith in Sahih al Bukhari? Every hadith in Sahih al Bukhari and Sahih Muslim is Sahih. Sahih means “genuine” or “authentic.” For Sunnis that means these ahadith collections are perfect and can’t be questioned.

    So they will come up with a further lie; that, yes, a woman can’t remarry her husband if she gets the “triple talak” from him. But they will insist that if she enters into a Halala marriage with an agreement with her interim husband that they intend to get divorced so she can return to her previous husband that is anathema. It is really adultery. The marriage must be genuine.

    Nowhere in the authentic sources will you find anything remotely hinting at that. Neither the Quran nor the ahadith colloctions (which form the major portion of the Sunnah of Muhammad, which is where Sunnis derive the name for their sect; they are the adherents of the Sunnah of Muhammad) ever mention anything about anyone’s intentions when entering into Halala marriage. And I’m supposed to believe that Allah and his prophet who permitted Nikah Muhtah or temporary marriage for a set, agreed upon term for a set, agreed upon price had an issue with another form of temporary marriage that was solely intended to put a divorced couple back in the good graces of some BS, inexplicable Shariah legal requirement? Please, that’s ridiculous. In fact, it was only after Muslims had lengthy contact with the west (and Christianity) that they realized just how embarrassing a lot of their theology actually is. Like the wife beating (S4:34) which they’ve been attempting to water down. Really, you can’t find any early commentators on the Quran (exegetes) who ever said anything like that. The all understood Halala marriage to mean a temporary marriage intended entirely to meet this legal requirement. Frankly, I can’t think of any commentators on the Quarn prior the 20th century such as Maoududi who embraced the concept.

    The telling thing is that in Britain it used to be the custom that the divorced woman would go to the local mosque and the Imam or Sheikh would arrange the Halala marriage with a man in their community. But there was not guarantee that the man would divorce her in the foreseeable future. Plus the woman had to pay the man to marry her, the opposite of Islamic law as a man has to pay a bride price. And these men were charging up to six thousand British pounds and only divorced the woman when he got tired of her sexually.

    So now, and maybe this is one of those great ideas you thing exists in Islam, the local clerics just perform the honors themselves. There are a great many mosques in the UK there the clerics have a room adjacent to their offices that contain nothing more than a bed. So they do the deed, then their “religious leader” signs a divorce decree when they go back into the office. And these “holy men” charge a lot less; between one thousand and twenty five hundred pounds.

    Where any of these one of the decent ideas you were thinking of? I Haven’t covered female genital mutilation or sex slavery. Perhaps it’s one of those.

I wonder what Rose McGowan is guilty of.

In all seriousness, I don’t think this has much significance beyond Ms. Argento. The more I learn about her, the sketchier she appears. She’s a real piece of work.

Its like Christmas every day now!!

Wake up, see which other self-righteous liberal icon has been outed as a sex offender.

Well over a hundred now.

LOL!!

You could write a book on how Leftism enables sexual predation.

It is not unusual for people who are abused to become abusers themselves.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend