Victim-blaming makes Lansbury a target
Until recently, 92-year-old actress Angela Lansbury was a millennial icon. She voiced Mrs. Potts in Disney’s 1991 production of Beauty and the Beast. She played mystery writer turned small-town sleuth, Jessica Fletcher, on the ’80s and ’90s TV show Murder She Wrote. For a lot of North American kids growing up around this time, myself included, Lansbury’s voice and ginghamdraped figure was familiar, heartwarming and, in the context of Murder She Wrote, an extremely powerful sedative. But Lansbury was also a tastemaker.
A few years ago, I wrote a piece about the actress’s resonance with hipsters of my generation for Maclean’s magazine. Jessica Fletcher’s jogging suits, oversized glasses and elaborate blouses on MSWinspired several fashion blogs dedicated to Lansbury, with titles such as “Cabot Cove Look Book” and “Murder she Wore.”
But the young generation that loved Lansbury well past her prime appears to have suddenly turned on her. The reason? Lansbury committed a sin that no amount of millennial hipster cred can wash away: She blamed the victim. In an interview published in Radio Times Magazine earlier this week, Lansbury said the following in reference to the recent allegations of sexual assault made against powerful men in Hollywood:
“There are two sides to this coin. We have to own up to the fact that women, since time immemorial, have gone out of their way to make themselves attractive. And unfortunately it has backfired on us — and this is where we are today. We must sometimes take blame, women. I really do think that. Although it’s awful to say we can’t make ourselves look as attractive as possible without being knocked down and raped.”
Lansbury clarifies in the interview that she does not believe victims are responsible for the abuse they endure. “Should women be prepared for this?” she asks. “No, they shouldn’t have to be! There’s no excuse for that. And I think it will stop now — it will have to.” She has also spoken out since the interview was published, claiming that her words were taken out of context and stating that “there is no excuse whatsoever for men to harass women in an abusive sexual manner.”
But the damage, as far as her young fans are concerned, is done. The 20to 30-somethings, who only days ago sang her praises, are now excoriating her on the internet. Some have even suggested on Twitter that news of Lansbury’s death would be preferable to news that the sweet lady who voiced Mrs. Potts is a rape apologist.
This reaction is obviously overblown and like all things that happen on Twitter, annoying. But I understand the sentiment that drives it. While I don’t condone any hatred flung Lansbury’s way, and while I believe she should be forgiven for her remarks, there is only one appropriate response to those remarks: condemnation. And yet, some have chosen not to condemn Lansbury’s comments outright, but to let the Dame off the hook with a heavy dose of ageist sympathy.
Here’s sex columnist Dan Savage, on the matter, on Twitter: “Leave Angela Lansbury alone. (Yes, what she said was offensive and unhelpful. Still. Leave *92-year-old* Angela Lansbury alone.)”
Here’s writer Laura Waddell, on Twitter: “Angela Lansbury’s comments show an attitude that does real harm. But most of all I feel very sad for her and all the other women who have lived by these rules and placed blame at their own door and I think reactions should contain compassion and reflection on generational change.”
And here’s Brianna Wu, a Democratic candidate for the United States Congress, also on Twitter: “Lansbury is wrong, but we should have empathy for the era she was raised in.”
I’m sorry, but do these people not know anybody with white hair who doesn’t harbour completely odious opinions? I’ve known a few elderly women in my time and none of them — not even the most conservative — would condone or say anything approaching what Lansbury told the Radio Times this week.
Of course there are many nonagenarians in this world who would and do happily “blame the victim,” but the notion that Lansbury’s old age should give her a pass in this instance is not only insulting to elderly feminists who would rather take a walk through Cabot Cove after dark than suggest rape victims are asking for it — it’s also hypocritical. We don’t give old men the benefit of the doubt when they casually suggest rape victims are responsible for their misfortune, nor do we give them the benefit of the doubt when they abuse women.
We don’t say about the old lechers currently being exposed in the media day in and day out, “Well, you know what, he was a man of his time, so what do you expect?”
Why, then, do we extend this courtesy — or I should say this sexism of low expectations — to elderly women? Are their brains so scrambled by advanced age and patriarchy that they can no longer be trusted to think for themselves, let alone wrestle with big moral questions?
Clearly Lansbury doesn’t think so. In a recent statement addressing the backlash to her initial remarks she said, “I am troubled by how quickly and brutishly some have taken my comments out of context and attempted to blame my generation, my age, or my mindset, without having read the entirety of what I said.”
Well, Dame Angela, I have read the entirety of what you said. And I respect you enough to tell you that in and out of context, it’s beneath you. Emma Teitel is a national affairs columnist.