At the end of November, journalist Jenny Cooney Carrillo asked Kate Winslet about the nature of working for Woody Allen.
“I think on some level Woody is a woman,” Winslet replied, as published in The Sydney Morning Herald. “I just think he’s very in touch with that side of himself. He understands the female characters he creates exceptionally well. His female characters are always so rich and large and honest in terms of how they’re feeling and he just knows how to write dialogue for them to communicate all that.”
As far as accidental media storms go, this was a shit-show. Of course, insinuating Woody Allen knows women better than anyone else is an interesting point to go public with, given the allegations of sexual assault that shroud his reputation.
More specifically, Winslet’s comments sit uncomfortably beside accusations that the director sexually abused his then step-daughter Dylan Farrow when she was just seven years old. Allen denies the claims.
Some months earlier, in September, she was also asked about working with Allen on Wonder Wheel.
“Having thought it all through, you put it to one side and just work with the person… Woody Allen is an incredible director. So is Roman Polanski. I had an extraordinary working experience with both of those men, and that’s the truth.”
Polanski, it should be noted, was charged with drugging and raping a 13-year-old girl in 1978, but never faced trial after fleeing the US.
While Winslet was on her press tour for a film that was punctuated by raised eyebrows and questions of complicity, J.K. Rowling found herself the centre of an equally as passionate PR disaster.
Why did the author keep accused domestic abuser Johnny Depp – of which there is footage detailing the extent of some of the abuse his ex Amber Heard experienced – in the role of Grindelwald for the Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them sequel? Why wasn’t he re-cast?
“When Johnny Depp was cast as Grindelwald, I thought he’d be wonderful in the role,” Rowling responded on Twitter to the furore.
“However, around the time of filming his cameo in the first movie, stories had appeared in the press that deeply concerned me and everyone most closely involved in the franchise.
“Harry Potter fans had legitimate questions and concerns about our choice to continue with Johnny Depp in the role. As David Yates, long-time Potter director, has already said, we naturally considered the possibility of recasting.
“I accept that there will be those who are not satisfied with our choice of actor in the title role. However, conscience isn’t governable by committee.
"Within the fictional world and outside it, we all have to do what we believe to be the right thing."
In the curious cases of the complicit women, why was the 'right' thing also the wildly controversial thing to do? Why was the right thing standing on the side of a man?
Of course, in a climate where sexual harassment is being taken seriously, but where court of public opinion has very real limitations, there are undercurrents of concern: How can we believe all women, when all women might not be telling the truth?
For Winslet, Allen was never found guilty. For Rowling, well, she did 'think' about re-casting him. Isn't that enough?
But for centuries we've given men the benefit of the doubt, and not afforded the same right to women. For a long time we've chosen to maintain the status quo and protect men's positions because it's easier.
At the crux of the current, revolutionary wave of believing women is the decision to turn the tables, just for a little while, to encourage other women to come forward with their experiences. Come forward, we're telling them, because we will believe you. We won't ignore you. We won't dismiss you. We won't go on pretending like nothing happened.
So today, as their names dominate the news cycle, some women are furious at Winslet and Rowling - two women who have so much power.
Because we don't want enablers, we want allies.
Then again, as disappointing as it is, we tend to direct a disproportionate share of our emotions towards women. Even if Winslet and Rowling are 'protecting' abusive men, why is our anger not more strongly aimed at those men? Why is it a woman's job to police the behaviour of the men around her?
We question the women in Woody Allen's orbit, but what about the men? We question J.K. Rowling about Depp's role in Fantastic Beasts, but why not the director, David Yates?
Yes, it's silence from men and women which keeps predatory or abusive men confident in their ability to plead innocence.
Confident in their claims of never doing anything wrong.
2017 is the year we lost all patience for the complicit. But in doing so, did we lose perspective of where the wrongdoing really lies?
Listen: Why the world is starting to stand up to sexual harassment at the hands of some very powerful men.
Top Comments
I get where you're going with this article as a woman, but you seem to miss some very valid & real concerns around what is starting to become a trial by media, The Geoffrey Rush's situation is starting to look like a case of this in respect of the defamation case against the Daily Telegraph.
I know well enough about the problems of sexual harassment, it was to lesser or greater degree firmly entrenched in many of Australia's organisations/industries up until quite recently,
I like many women have had my fare share of approaches, but the issue I'm seeing here is that articles like this are lumping those people that have been charged with sexual harassment in with those that have crossed the line into the assault territory & that haven't had due process applied here, it means those that aren't guilty are being Shanghaied into career purgatory that they may or may not have a case to answer to, for whatever reason this is dangerous at so many levels, as well as being extremely unhelpful,
Yes men like Woody Allen should have been kicked to the curb along time ago, but unfortunately as far as Hollywood is concerned the horse bolted many years ago, (which makes it no less reprehensible) I like many have an extremely low tolerance for Allen, & "his talent" & film making skills. but the thing is that Kate Winslet has been quoted in such a way that (I include social media in this) whichever interviewer did this & whoever edited & produced this, set up Winslet in such a way that she was unable to win no matter what she said, the context around what she discussed about her experience of working with him, it isn't about anything else.
I will be honest with you that if you don't start looking at things in proper context you will create a situation where women who've actually worked with these men (& I include JK Rowling in this observation) will be less inclined to talk openly as they won't be able to get their message across, you will not only alienate them, but you will help put this particularly awful power play that many people in power have visited on those younger less powerful, particularly women back 50 years.
Women like Winslet & Rowling have worked in this field & with these men that have been found wanting for many years, they work in an industry that is deeply flawed, the British film & tv industry may be not so much, but the American scene has always had that dark underbelly, there's no surprise there.
My impression of this article is that it is trying to extrapolate the situations around particularly Johnny Depp & trying to put him in the same category as Woody Allen, which largely is a shortsighted nonsense. You can't compare apples with oranges, this narrative you're trying to create so as fit both situations into, is to me a sign of desperation & that you needed to make up the quota of articles for the week & you've just cobbled these current story's together & tried to make it look like you've actually come out with a unique take on what is going on here. Thinking you can get away with cobbling these bits together that you think should work, which is laughable.
The author has the argument sitting in her head, with this being what they want others to hear & think, but it lacks any real cohesion.
We also need to be clear that Amber Heard had already gone on the public record around what went on in her marriage to Johnny Depp & the reality is that they are only two people that can comment on what went on within the relationship, you don't get to distort their experience because you belong to the court of public opinion, nothing more, nothing less.
You're doing your readership a great disservice, with articles like this.
I actually worked for a real court years ago & your article would be laughed out of any court in the land. I know it's the author's opinion, but around this particular subject we really need proper input, especially for young people who may just be looking at career choices & opportunities.
Young people need to be taught ways around managing their own self agency, how to protect themselves & prevent unwanted advances from older more powerful people.
I doubt we will see likes of Weinstein, Harris, Bourke or Spacey if the entertainment industry's in the US, Australia & The UK, continue with this purge. The Weinstein Affect is being felt worldwide. It's concerning though that as a woman's online magazine that you are prepared to paint all men with the same brush, no matter what they are accused of, but also the women that work with them, have to pay due to their guilt by association.....On my reading of the article your treading a slippery slope, & really these type of articles are largely unhelpful, at best & ignorant as well as lazily researched.
Maybe there's a pendulum swing happening here? Women have been the unfortunate victims by being denied justice as powerful men got away with repulsive things. It's not fair to be on the wrong side of the pendulum swing, but perhaps there's been a swing and for a while it will be innocent men instead of innocent women bearing the brunt of public opinion? No better for sure, but at least there's movement and potential for change. Would I be cynical in saying it might prompt legislators to take serious action to address the handling of sexual harassment cases in the courts? It's a minefield and in my opinion needs different handling from other more concrete crimes such as theft.
Well, one of the four teenagers who tortured, abused and kidnapped another teen early this year in Chicago and live-streamed it on her Facebook account just got to walk with no jail time and 200 hours of community service despite a guilty finding of a hate crime on top. I don’t think female perps really seem to get the book thrown at them either, not even for taking part in torture. We will see if the males get off so lightly shortly.
As to Hollywood, overall I think it’s a good thing, at least the listen part of listen and believe. The problem is to automatically believe is by default presume the accussed to be guilty and that’s a serious problem. So often if it’s a he said - she said and that’s all, they cancel each other out unless you want a system where a woman’s word is unquestioned compared to a mans or vicea versa solely on the basis of gender and that’s not equality. Quite the opposite.
True. The problem has been that the males HAVE got off so lightly all these years. I don't condone abuse of anyone, but what I'm saying is that women have borne the brunt by not being believed in the past, and often losing their jobs and credibility. Is it worse now that it's happening to men?
I’m still not sure men get off more lightly than women in the courts, it seems very very hard for a woman to go to prison in the West. To be fair, some days it seems that applies to some men as well. How many times do read about a guy being out on parole or bail getting convicted of a serious crime? Makes you just shake your head.
Where I agree with you is many guilty men get away without ever facing court in crimes against women. Most women, most people aren’t false accusers. If they claim they were raped, it’s probably true. But if there is no evidence and the man denies it, there’s no way to proceed. You can’t make a contested case without evidence. That’s why two things need to happen. If you are raped or assaulted you need to contact police immediately as there is the chance to collect evidence and question the subject to his alibi. The second thing is we need to ensure proven false accusers get serious punishment for doing that because it diminishes all women’s credibility if it’s known they could make a false accusation and not be punished for doing so. Put more confidence that the system works and take away some doubt in jurors minds.
Think of yourself as a juror, one case the woman comes forward with no police report 15 years after it happened and the accused is running for office. The other case she called the police immediately. One we can completely understand, the other has questions around it.