People are saying a bunch about how Asia Argento's apparent settlement with a young man who accused her of sexual assault somehow invalidates a movement Argento had a good part in starting: #MeToo. Apart from the obvious point that this is a simple example of the tu quoque ("You Too!") fallacy of informal logic, let's take a look at the facts.
Argento is said to have been more or less compelled into non-consensual sex acts (a.k.a. "sexual assault" or colloquially "rape") with Harvey Weinstein in the 1990s, and in 2013 was single and made a number of social media posts suggesting, shall we say, a very intimate friendship with her alleged victim. I can't say whether she's guilty or not, but they aren't the kind of thing you want provided in a court of law.
But for the sake of argument, what does it mean if she is guilty? Well, we know that Argento is a victim, and that victims often become victimizers. Now, does this minimize the importance of #MeToo, or does it emphasize realities of which we were already aware? I'd argue the latter.
In the same way, the recent report listing ~ 300 offenders in a few dioceses in Pennsylvania offers the Catholic Church a wonderful opportunity to contribute to the conversation if they will only take it. The offenders may be out of the reach of the law, but shouldn't part of their penance be to talk with psychologists and other experts in the area about how they first found out about their perverse desires, how they acted them out, and the like? Maybe do some community education about how to prevent this kind of thing in the future?
Yes, part of me wants blood here, but another part also wants people to recognize the signs that something is seriously wrong. Rome can help a lot with this.
Podcast #1047: The Roman Caesars’ Guide to Ruling
-
The Roman caesars were the rulers of the Roman Empire, beginning in 27 BC
with Julius Caesar’s heir Augustus, from whom subsequent caesars took their
nam...
8 hours ago
1 comment:
Hi nice readinng your blog
Post a Comment