The day of the women
The trial had the drama of a Hollywood epic and a fit, just ending. But the morality of Harvey Weinstein’s sentence is lost on him, writes Sue de Groot, as his self-justifying rants at his accusers show
In Federico Fellini’s 1974 film, Amarcord, the giant replica of Mussolini’s head is as ridiculous and insubstantial as a sand castle. One strong wind and the features of the once-mighty ruler will collapse and crumble into dirt.
Harvey Weinstein has all the narcissistic traits that characterise a tyrant, chief among which is the belief that his dominance and superiority must surely be recognised by others.
When the 67-year-old Weinstein was found guilty of rape and sentenced to 23 years in prison this week it marked a milestone, bringing to a conclusion two and a half years of open warfare between the movie mogul and some of the women he abused. When the first accusations were aired in October 2017, quickly gaining momentum and becoming a landslide, he scrambled to retain his position at the top of the Hollywood ladder. He even — as detailed in e-mails unsealed by the court this month —
approached several billionaire friends, among them Jeff Bezos and Michael Bloomberg, to help salvage his reputation.
The remorse he voiced in these communications, and the promises he made to change his behaviour, seemed manufactured. More believable were the selfpitying rants and fury directed at women who dared to challenge his authority.
This self-regard continued to characterise his behaviour during the trial, where he repeatedly ignored the judge when instructed to set aside his phone and played the sympathy card with displays of physical fragility believed by many to be merely a ruse.
Weinstein feels hard done by. The ill-advised statement he made in court before his sentencing came straight from his ego. While admitting no guilt or shame, he could not resist taking credit for the entire #MeToo movement, because that’s how Harvey rolls. “You know,” he said, “the movement started basically with me, and I think what happened, you know, I was the first example, and now there are thousands of men who are being accused and a regeneration of things that I think none of us understood.”
It got worse. After comparing his trial to the witchhunt against communists in the McCarthy era, Weinstein seemed to indicate that his strong work ethic and his generosity in raising money for worthy causes should somehow exonerate his other behaviour.
He went into great detail about a hypothetical hospital he planned to build in which people accused of unspecified acts would be “made to work”.
He also claimed to have discovered empathy since this “crisis” began, and expressed remorse for “having extramarital affairs”.
But not once, not even in a slanted or obscure way, did he apologise to any of the women whom he violated, women who produced enough evidence to satisfy a court of his guilt and convince a judge to lock him up for what will probably be the rest of his unnatural life.
Many have hailed this as a victory for the #MeToo movement, and in many ways it is, because women used as throwaway objects in the film industry no longer feel alone in voicing their outrage. There is more of a chance that they will be heard and heeded. This, in turn, has made the powerful cabal more cautious of casual misogyny.
Weinstein’s overweening flaw is that he still does not see what he did as the exploitation of the powerless by the powerful.
In his bizarre attempt at self-exoneration he said: “I was not about power, I was about making great movies.”
Perhaps he really believes it. Perhaps he will serve out the rest of his days in a prison cell replaying scenes from those movies in his head, never questioning why he thought that being the maker of the movies gave him unlimited access to the bodies of women who were in them.
Like all inmates entering the New York State
Weinstein’s overweening flaw is that he still does not see what he did as the exploitation of the powerless by the powerful
Department of Corrections and Community Supervision system, Weinstein will have been given a shower, delousing treatment, a physical and dental examination, a shave and a haircut. Also according to published protocols, he will be given a pamphlet, The Prevention of Sexual Abuse in Prison; What Inmates Need to Know, and be required to watch a “genderspecific version of the film Ending Sexual Abuse Behind the Walls; An Orientation”.
The irony of this will likely be lost on the man who still seems to think he holds the power cards.
The fall of Mussolini did not rid the world of fascism. Likewise, Weinstein’s Waterloo will not break the deep-rooted link between the ownership of material goods and the perceived right to dominate and dispose of women. But it is a start.