Woman accuses Harvey Weinstein of assaulting her while she was on her period

Embed from Getty Images

Yesterday, a former production assistant named Mimi Haleyi came out and told her story about Harvey Weinstein. You can read Mimi’s story here. The story has been widely covered in an interesting and disturbing way, and I wanted to stop for a second and really talk about the weirdness of some of the coverage. Haleyi described being sexually assaulted when Weinstein forced himself on her orally, much like Asia Argento claimed he did to her too. Haleyi describes how Weinstein harassed her and propositioned her and she tried to shut him down by telling him that she was on her period so nothing was going to happen anyway. He then forced himself on her, took out of her tampon and did… that. Here’s my question: why are people behaving like the fact that she was on her period is the worst part of this story? He literally sexually assaulted her – in many jurisdictions, what he did would be considered rape. The story here isn’t “Weinstein is disgusting because he went down on a woman who was on her period.” The story is “Weinstein sexually assaulted a woman who repeatedly said no.”

Here’s another part of the expansive Weinstein story we should talk about, courtesy of Danish actress Connie Nielsen. From Nielsen’s Variety op-ed:

As I add my name to the rapidly expanding list of women whom Harvey Weinstein has harassed, I feel a strong wish to clarify just how well-known Harvey’s actions were in our community throughout his reign as one of the most powerful players in the industry. I worked on the Harvey Weinstein-produced “The Great Raid,” where I warned a young co-star not to take Harvey up on his invitations to drinks unless the whole group was there. I had no issues on the film, nor when I met Harvey at social events around the world.

It was therefore a real shock when Harvey proceeded to put his hand on my thigh at dinner during the opening night of “Great Raid,” at which both my boyfriend and my brother were present. I grabbed his hand and squeezed it violently to hurt him and proceeded to hold it in place on his own thigh. I steered clear of him as soon as I could for the rest of the evening but soon forgot about it, until the New York Times and New Yorker pieces set off a landslide.

In the accounts I have read of Harvey’s harassment, many state they weren’t “that girl,” meaning, I presume, that they were not the kind of woman who would base her career on sexual favors. I may be naive, but it seems to me that no woman sets out to base her career on sexual favors. I cannot think of a single famous female actor who isn’t also talented, and I doubt a statistically relevant quantity of actresses exists who look to skip the work with a sexual shortcut.

The oft-mentioned “casting couch” is a term that both denigrates female actors by association and intimates their complicity in a bargain. The term glosses over the fact that propositioning someone for sex in exchange for work is sexual harassment, a crime in every state of the union. It has been mentioned many times that Harvey often bragged of the many beautiful actresses he made that “bargain” with, though of course it was no “bargain” — it was alleged rape and sexual coercion. Like other predators, Harvey is imbued with a strong dose of charisma and a hint of not so hidden vulnerability. Like them, Harvey could suss out vulnerability in his victims — the young, those whose jobs and careers were put on the line or those whose circumstances had made them vulnerable.

I doubt “that girl” is an actual norm, and as the recent revolution against Harvey’s regime of intimidation and harassment indicates, “that girl” is simply someone who gave in to coercion and harassment and is therefore the victim of a crime. “That girl” was vulnerable to manipulation, coercion or physical violence she should have never been exposed to in the first place — and she should not be shamed for that. No one knows how they would act were they equipped with different childhoods, traumas and levels of resilience. As long as we suspect female actors of being somehow complicit in their own victimization, as willing participants in their own humiliation, we shame the victim and enable the culture of silence that allows predators to act with impunity.

[From Variety]

Man, Connie Nielsen is FIRE. I love her. I love the way she broke that down. Just one week ago, I had sort of resigned myself to the idea that the Harvey Weinstein scandal would only really affect Harvey himself in the long-term, that there would be few (if any) long-term repercussions within Hollywood. But as more male executives resign and more men are being called out and more victims are coming forward, it really does feel like… there might be some bigger structural changes afoot.

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Getty.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

26 Responses to “Woman accuses Harvey Weinstein of assaulting her while she was on her period”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. mm says:

    He’s probably a drug addict too

    • whatWHAT? says:

      even if he’s not, he’d likely use that as an excuse. just like so many cheaters/rapists do with the whole “sex addict” angle. NOT saying there aren’t sex addicts, just that most of those who claim they are AREN’T actually…they’re just unwilling to be monogamous.

      I never thought HW was attractive, but now that I know what I know about him, his appearance give me the SHUDDERS. pics of him make me squirm. ew.

    • Handwoven says:

      What drug? And why would it be relevant or an excuse?

  2. PPP says:

    I kind of think it makes perfect sense that things are exploding now. I think there’s a collective feeling of helplessness at being unable to get Trump out of office, and watching people fall short of taking action against him, and he’s just emblematic of awful behavior being enabled by complicity. The only thing we can do is take down the trickle down Trumps.

    • Dimed says:

      “Trickle down Trump” is a great term. This explanation of our feeling of collective helplessness makes a lot of sense.

    • Casey _ says:

      Wonderful assessment @PPP – on point.

      ..and OMG, Connie Nielsen is as brilliant as I always assumed. Her last paragraph is what I was clumsily trying to say about Matt and George in their current thread, she wrote:

      “As long as we suspect female actors of being somehow complicit in their own victimization, as willing participants in their own humiliation, we shame the victim and enable the culture of silence that allows predators to act with impunity.”

      Read this over and over again Matt and George, and everyone who doesn’t get it yet. George likes to boast about his ‘smart wife,’ but apparently she can’t break it down like Connie, or else she’s holding back on him not wanting to make him feel bad- whatever, he still doesn’t get it, and keeps putting his foot in it. This piece by Ms. Nielsen should be read by all.

      Lastly, when I first saw her in Gladiator and for years afterward I didn’t understand why she wasn’t a bigger star. I’ve concluded her brilliance must have turned off some movers and shakers.

  3. Neo says:

    And this is just what he did in countries with laws protecting victims, to women with agents and status. Someone burn this man’s passport.

  4. Sixer says:

    Kudos to Connie. Tell it like it is, sister.

  5. Skylark says:

    That’s an excellent piece by Connie Nielsen.

  6. Katherine says:

    Wow that op-ed is excellent! I should add though that even the arguably untalented female actors who ‘made it’ very, very likely believed they had significant talent worth recognition when they started out.

    As for ‘how one would react’, in the ongoing discussion I’ve noticed comments that were neglecting to distinguish between readiness to fight off someone perceived as low to medium power holder (basically dude overestimated his social or physical leverage) and freezing reaction to an aggressor who is perceived as high retaliation threat – much larger, strong, with considerable influence and power etc.

  7. Vovacia says:

    Wow. That is so good. It just carves it’s way through the bullshit making salient point after point.

  8. Tania says:

    Yes Connie!!!!

  9. littlemissnaughty says:

    Well, damn. It makes that wretched op-ed by Mayim Bialik look that much worse. This is excellent writing.

  10. IB says:

    I actually looked up the statute of limitations for rape in NJ the other week. I also tracked down every email and fb message I sent leading up to and following the date I was ‘set up on’ in college that resulted in my assault. (I had been too petrified/nauseated to ever reread them. I was hardly more than a kid in 2011.) So collecting receipts. Just in case….
    I haven’t decided what I am going to do with them yet, but damn if every story I have seen in the past few weeks hasn’t made me feel more empowered than I ever have before.
    I had never looked up the statute of limitations because I assumed I was past it. (I am not; it was 2011, and NJ has no statute of limitations on sexual assault. ) I also assumed that because I didn’t get a rape kit at the time my legitimacy would be nil. I have been heartened to see that may not always be the case.
    You will all be delighted to know that the douchebag was a star rower at Princeton, got a highly paid consulting job, and is now running some venture fund out in Silicon Valley. Men raised to think they can do anything, and society rewards them accordingly.

    • emma33 says:

      IB, wow, that is awful, to be set up in that way. I really wish you strength moving forward, whichever path you decide to take. It is great that other women coming forward have been a support to you. Hugs from Mexico, more power to you!

  11. Neelyo says:

    Go Miss Nielsen!!! Love her!

  12. Amazing, awesome, and right on point.

  13. lower case lois says:

    How sick is this predator? And he thinks he’s ‘cured’ after one week of treatment? I hope he is arrested, prosecuted and sent to prison for a long time.

  14. Newyorking says:

    Weinstein is sick. I remember going to “Hugh Jackman on Broadway” and Hugh announced that his friend “Harvey Weinstein” was in the audience, and had him stand up and everybody clap for him. Back then I was new to the country and barely knew who he was. Over the years I have heard rumblings on blogs. I have every sympathy for the women and completely understand that they were victims. What I have a hard time understanding is that why this woman went back to him knowing her experience where she was crying. Weinstein was a pig to put her in this situation, but knowingly she went back to him again and again because she felt he could make a difference in her career. I don’t know, I find it hard to be sympathetic. Especially if she cried in her first meeting with him. It is like if you know certain areas are unsafe you avoid them. Of course women shouldn’t even have to think that way, but if she were in this situation with Harvey over and over, why go back?

    • Marieeeee says:

      My response whenever I hear people say things like this- Why did she go back? Why did you stay with him? Why didn’t you leave? Why would she let herself be alone with him again? Why continue working with him?- is always the same, regardless of whether the subject is assault, sexual harassment, abusive relationship, etc. My response is always: I am happy to see that you apparently don’t know firsthand what it’s like to be abused, manipulated, gaslighted, intimidated into staying in a situation you’re not comfortable with. Because the only way one can ask those questions is if they can’t relate, in which case I’m glad you don’t know.

      • Cole says:

        Thank you – I’m stealing that response

      • Newyorking says:

        Read my comment again. I didn’t say why didn’t she leave, I said, why did she go back to him. Clearly she had a bad experience and she went back a couple of times. Of course I understand that once she was there she was manipulated and intimated, that is not what I am saying at all. Why did she go to him? There was no manipulation or intimidation involved there.

  15. Burdseyeview says:

    When I was 15 a friends uncle made what they called bak in th day -advances – towards me – like chatting me up, kissing me n stuff. It wasnt until I was a bit older when I met him at a wedding he propositioned me – I told him to f…k off n that he was a dirty old man. I didnt tell anyone else cos I thought he was drunk and that id dealt with him. Years later I discovered hed been abusing his own granddaughters and hung himself before he went to court. Do I wish id said something to someone? Of course I do – I hav no way of knowing if it woudve made any difference but what those little girls had to suffer makes me sick to my stomach and I feel guilty that I never said anything.