Georgina Chapman: ‘There was a part of me that was terribly naive—clearly, so naive’

The 89th Annual Academy Awards Arrivals

Georgina Chapman speaks. And I don’t know how I feel about it. I think it might have been better for her to sit down with the New York Times or Ronan Farrow or someone hard-newsy to just get through all of the Harvey Weinstein questions in one go. But that’s not what she chose to do. She went to Vogue, and Vogue obliged with a lengthy interview/profile which includes some comments about Weinstein, but the bulk of the piece is about Chapman’s life, the start of Marchesa, the future of Marchesa and Chapman’s new life now. While those things are somewhat interesting, let’s not forget: her husband was out there, raping and assaulting women for decades. While that’s Harvey Weinstein’s fault alone, it does seem kind of gross/uncomfortable to devote this much space and time to Chapman’s childhood in England, you know? You can read the full Vogue piece here. Some highlights:

Chapman claims she didn’t offer any celebrities any gowns for the 2018 awards season: “We didn’t feel it was appropriate given the situation. All the women who have been hurt deserve dignity and respect, so I want to give it the time it deserves. It’s a time for mourning, really.” But she still has celebrity supporters: “A lot of people reached out and said, ‘Let me wear something,’” and Scarlett Johansson picked a Marchesa gown to wear to May’s Met ball.

She barely left her house in five months after the stories broke: “I was so humiliated and so broken . . . that . . . I, I, I . . . didn’t think it was respectful to go out. I thought, Who am I to be parading around with all of this going on? It’s still so very, very raw. I was walking up the stairs the other day and I stopped; it was like all the air had been punched out of my lungs.”

She’s been to see a therapist: “I have. At first I couldn’t, because I was too shocked. And I somehow felt that I didn’t deserve it. And then I realized: This has happened. I have to own it. I have to move forward.”

She says all of this as she sobs: “There was a part of me that was terribly naive—clearly, so naive. I have moments of rage, I have moments of confusion, I have moments of disbelief! And I have moments when I just cry for my children. What are their lives going to be? What are people going to say to them? It’s like, they love their dad. They love him….I just can’t bear it for them!”

How she views her Marchesa creations: “We’re not doing disposable fashion. We treat each dress like a piece of jewelry, an entity unto itself, with its own journey. It’s not just one in a queue.”

What happened to her after the Weinstein revelations came to light: “I lost ten pounds in five days. I couldn’t keep food down.” I ask her how long it took for her to absorb the information. “About two days,” she says. “My head was spinning. And it was difficult because the first article was about a time long before I’d ever met him, so there was a minute where I couldn’t make an informed decision. And then the stories expanded and I realized that this wasn’t an isolated incident. And I knew that I needed to step away and take the kids out of here.”

The idea that she should have known about her husband: Even Chapman points out that—putting aside the enormity of her situation—women are betrayed by their husbands every day because they turn out to be not the men their wives thought they were. “I don’t want to be viewed as a victim because I don’t think I am. I am a woman in a sh-t situation, but it’s not unique.”

Whether she thought she had a good marriage before the revelations came to light: “That’s what makes this so incredibly painful: I had what I thought was a very happy marriage. I loved my life.” Asked if she was ever suspicious about his behavior, she says, “Absolutely not. Never.” For one thing, he traveled constantly. “And I’ve never been one of those people who obsesses about where someone is.”

She’s in regular contact with Weinstein, and this is what she says about his state of mind: “Well,” she replies with a roll of the eyes, “not really. Clearly when I was married to him I didn’t know anything about his state of mind, so I’m probably not the best person to ask.”

[From Vogue]

I mean… I have complicated feelings about all of this as well, just as I have complicated feelings about how this interview and profile is being presented. Anna Wintour devoted her editor’s letter to Chapman’s comeback as well, and we know Wintour was very wrapped up in Weinstein’s business dealings too. By helping Chapman’s “comeback,” Wintour is also helping herself. Do I think that Chapman was out there, Camille Cosby-ing for her husband? No, I don’t believe that. But I also believe that willful ignorance is not the same as girlish naivete, you know?

The 89th Annual Academy Awards Arrivals

Photos courtesy of WENN.

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

117 Responses to “Georgina Chapman: ‘There was a part of me that was terribly naive—clearly, so naive’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Lemon says:

    Urgh just go away.

    • Mia4s says:

      Seconded. This is a gross whitewash from the same clique that allowed Weinstein to thrive.

      I HIGHLY recommend Yashar Ali’s take here:

      • Renee says:

        Thanks for the link Mia4s. I read it & agree with Ali’s assessment.

      • Laura says:

        That is a smart and thoughtful article. Thank you for sharing it with us and I’d much rather Georgina answer those questions than the Vouge interview.

      • Kobro says:

        Thank you for the link. And could not agree more.

        this is so disgusting.

      • DragonWise says:

        Agreed. Very well-written article, and I agree with the writer’s assessment. It’s the “years of credible rumours” he mentioned and stuff allegedly said in front of her that bothers me. She knew she was married to a philandering bully, but may very well not have known he was a rapist. I’d honestly feel better about her “comeback” if she just admitted that she was a trophy wife married to a powerful man whose influence helped her business, and it was in her best interest to look the other way. It isn’t a heartwarming truth, but it would be a hell of a lot more honest than “I had no idea!” Sure, Jan.

      • MagicalDay says:

        This interview reads like a sympathy pitch from a privileged white lady married to a “let boys be boys” arrangement, a la melania trump. They get their lifestyle -spa and have an hobby businesses- whilst they either collude or feign blind. Nope. i left a trophy wife situation long ago – because- I couldn’t raise myself or my child in a climate of abuse-no matter how glamourous. #wouldRatherCleanHousesForaRealLIfe

      • Lola says:

        Thank you for posting the link. And, even though I understand the author I also understand technology and children. You can still find articles in the internet published more than 5 years ago, we all know this. If mom speaks ill of father, the children are going to hear it. Don’t know how old they are, but again if mom says too much or too little the children are going to hear it or read it for themselves. You need a balance here. And imho the press is not going to give it, victims are hurting still, mom needs to look after her children regardless the criticism she faces.

      • what's inside says:

        This is the white-washing of Georgina Chapman, kind of like what Camilla underwent in her image rehab for public consumption. Georgina comes across as more excited about Marchesa with a quick second place to woe is me and my children. Did Harvey treat her to some of his annimalistic behavior? I think probably so and she was glad when he turned his attention elsewhere. Anna Wintour is treading the well worn path to hell, something she is no stranger to when dealing with the devil.

    • enike says:

      I think that article Mia linked is an agressive and low quality one… endless accusations, accusations…. that´s she calls investigative reporting?
      “I wrote an email to Chapman, she didnt answer”

      I am going to write for the Huffington post, easy job evidently, you dont need any facts, just your imagination and enough acid to write articles like this
      very telling about her journalistic skills

  2. Electric Tuba says:

    Ugh I’m not touching her or this with a ten foot pole. God speed my friends

    • otaku fairy says:

      It’s a mess. I can believe she may not have known about the sexual assaults before 2015. The “If I knew Harvey was a sleaze from gossip blogs and I’m from Buttfuck, GA, anyone in Hollywood who says they didn’t know he was a rapist must be lying” argument ignores how the gossip about Harvey had been portrayed before, and why other public figures- especially women in the public eye- might not always consider that kind of gossip so trustworthy.
      However, I don’t believe that Georgina never suspected or at least heard cheating rumors about Weinstein. And it doesn’t seem like she’s being straightforward about what she knew in 2015. The truth seems to be that she just didn’t believe that victim- when the case didn’t go any further, she chose believing her husband and the father of her children over believing a woman accusing him of sexual assault. Then, two years later, when the full truth about what Weinstein has been up to for decades came out, it hit her.
      So far, no victim has said that Georgina played any role in their abuse, and she hasn’t defended her husband. At best, we have a woman who didn’t believe the victim the first time her husband was accused of abuse. If her guilt stops there and there are still people in Hollywood who want to support her, that’s understandable. Foolish and shortsighted (since Georgina isn’t the biggest victim here even if that’s true), but understandable. But it could be worse than that.

      • Kobro says:

        Totally agree> I am not in the entertainment business and I was aware of what Harvey Weinstein did.

  3. Nicole says:

    …yeaaaaa I have no words. Cause I don’t buy exactly what she’s selling

    • pyritedigger says:

      I’m pretty shocked she came out with the “We were in love and everything was perfect and I’m totally blindsided” narrative. This story definitely doesn’t hold water based on the fact that Weinstein was a notorious bully, and there was that Italian model who tried to press charges in 2015.

      She would have been much better off saying that she knew her husband was a cheater, but she could never imagined that he did the things he’s done. What she should have been “naive” about was buying his excuses in 2015 that this was some misunderstanding or a shakedown or whatever. Or that he’d scream and verbally abuse her if she questioned too much and since she was a frequent target of his abuse, she just left him alone to do his thing. I might have bought that since it runs with what we know about the dude…but this…no, I don’t.

      • Mariposa says:

        Yes, she didn’t do herself any favors with the ‘happy families’ narrative. It wasn’t like Weinstein was some slick sociopath that presented one face to the world and a completely different face just to his victims (like say, Ted Bundy). This guy was an out and out bully to almost EVERYONE.

  4. minx says:

    Sigh. I don’t know what to think about her just yet.

    • EMc says:

      I’m with you. Until I hear from someone who can say that she was directly involved with forcing or bullying her into wearing one of her designs, I’m giving her the benefit of the doubt. I don’t think she’s being totally honest about not knowing anything was going on, but I am going to believe she wasn’t part of the hostile forcing of dresses unless I hear it directly from the person.

      • Ankhel says:

        Agreed. I don’t want to condemn her solely based on my knowledge of her ex and their formerly joint finances. No one has said – yet- that Georgina assaulted them, bullied them or told them they would have to do as she liked, because Weinstein.

    • Kitten says:

      Same. Mixed feelings. I completely understand the criticism of her, but I also know SO many women who were in relationships with toxic men and didn’t realize it until it was too late. Whether it was willful ignorance or naiveté or consciously denying what they saw by turning a blind eye to appalling behavior.
      The thing is, I’m not sure it’s relevant what precipitated the denial. Women are socially conditioned to excuse and justify awful male behavior. It’s what we do.

      It’s clear from some of her comments that they had a lot of distance in their relationship. It seems odd to me that she wouldn’t have at least a passing concern about infidelity while he was away traveling for months. Or maybe it did occur to her but she never thought that he would be actively targeting, assaulting, and harassing so many women.

      It’s my instinct to give women the benefit of the doubt but I’m not sure that’s the best approach anymore. I don’t you said: mixed feelings.

      • jenna says:

        I have mixed feelings too. Like I always assumed it was a business arrangement, which is fine, but she treats it as if it was indeed love, and that all of this is a shock. But… he was the entire reason Marchesa became a thing, surely she must have known that these actresses weren’t wearing Marchesa for any other reason? And even if you remove all the assaults and the rape, he was famed for his temper and volatility, and she makes no mention of it? And my god what about the accusations a couple of years ago, with the woman in New York who accused him of harassment? Surely that’s a red flag, Georgina. It’s all really strange.

        Like I imagined her as somebody in a glass box, putting up with this horrible man because she wanted the career and the fashion success, and I don’t judge her for that. But playing this whole thing as a love match gone shockingly awry just isn’t legit-sounding.

        I want to believe her, because I believe in trusting women who have been in these situations, but this specific thing is so shady. The whole “I had no inkling whatsoever”, even in terms of Weinstein’s famous rage and vitriol. SMH.

      • Annabelle Bronstein says:

        @jenna the fact that she never suspected is a bit suspicious. But she’s so beautiful and he’s such an ogre, that maybe she really didn’t suspect it? Sometimes gorgeous people marry less attractive people for the sense of “security.”

        I’m giving GC the benefit of the doubt because no one has spoken an ill word of her, even in all this. I’m tired of women being told to go away due to the actions of a man. Last I checked, even married people are still individuals.

      • Asiyah says:

        I also have mixed feelings. I would never compare my situation with hers because my former nutcase (that I know of) didn’t prey on women the way Weinstein did, and obviously doesn’t have his power or money, but I was with a toxic person who had fits of rage a la Weinstein and did a lot of shady stuff. I won’t say I was fully aware, but for a long time I was somewhat aware that there was something off beyond his borderline personality disorder, that he was using me and other women, and that he wasn’t entirely truthful. I didn’t have enough solid proof, and that’s one reason why I CHOSE to engage in WILFUL ignorance, as well as my own personal reasons (laziness, not wanting to confront my own d*mons, etc.). I slowly found out the truth about this disgusting person and when I was finally confronted by it, I blamed myself like there’s no tomorrow because while his actions were his fault, I enabled him by playing stupid. And this is on a smaller scale, naturally.

        My mixed feelings are because I don’t think she didn’t suspect or know. She knew a lot more than she says she does, and she CHOSE to enable him for her own personal reasons. I won’t judge that but I will judge her naive act. At least say something like “I had heard rumors, but chose to believe my husband instead.” Don’t give me this naive crap.

      • Kitten says:

        @ Asiyah-Thanks for sharing your story. I wasn’t ever in an abusive relationship, but my last relationship was completely toxic and dysfunctional. I allowed myself to be treated quite poorly and all the while I excused, justified, and condoned his crappy behavior. Mind you, I had friends and eventually family (gently) telling me that it wasn’t a healthy relationship. We were constantly breaking up and making up (yeah um, red flag) until the last fight we had. Suddenly, it was like someone turned the lights on and I could finally see the relationship for the mess that it was. I finally realized that I was experiencing a version of our relationship that was entirely divorced from reality.
        I feel obligated to reiterate that he never physically or verbally abused me, but he did emotionally abuse me.

        All that is to say that I completely understand what you said about enabling and excusing. Looking back, I enabled a toxic pattern simply by staying with him for as long as I did. So I get Georgina in a way. She loved her life, she loved the outside perception of her life, and she didn’t want anything to change. That alone can be a powerful motivating factor to stay with someone. Not an excuse for her, just a way to say that I can see how she would play along. Divorces are difficult, even more so when you have kids involved, and her entire life was intertwined with her husband’s.

      • Asiyah says:

        @ Kitten

        100% agree. I wish she had said what you said instead. I think people would be more sympathetic to her if what she said was rooted in reality. It’s not easy to just pick up and leave when you love your life and there are children involved.

    • BorderMollie says:

      Same. There’s so many complicated issues here. Possibly, she’s been in the Hollywood bubble so long that the toxic behaviors that thrive there have almost become normalized or she may have let her own cognitive dissonance dismiss the worst stories about her husband so as not to disrupt her life too much. It’s not necessarily as simple as ranking her a vile enabler or an ignorant angel. Humans are complicated etc etc

      • Sunglasses Aready says:

        I wish her well and I feel sorry for her BUT I feel more very deeply sorry for the victims of her husband. Whoever advised Chapman that doing The Vogue article, was a good idea, she should quite frankly never listen to them again. Its too soon. She needs to start over, start a new label because the truth of the matter is Marchesa is not going to sell.

  5. BaronSamedi says:

    If we believe the victims then we have to also believe her.

    She and her children are not responsible for his crimes and I will never, ever think it’s ok to lay any of it at her feet.

    If people want to boycott her company because of her association with him they should feel free to do it. But I’m gonna side-eye them for it and I’m free to do that too.

    • QueenB says:

      She isnt responsible for the sex crimes but she is responsible of building her brand on threats and bullying against women.

      She isnt just a bystander. I would never blame Matt Lauers wife for his actions.

      • Bridget says:

        Indeed. We have 2 separate issues going on here. Georgina isn’t responsible for Harvey preying on woman after woman. BUT that’s also not the issue here. Her label, Marchesa, was built upon the connections that Harvey made, and the appearances that he strong armed. At best, she was willfully ignorant – it’s not exactly a mystery that Harvey was the biggest bully in town. Have you read some of the public stories about him that have been around the whole time?!?

        Georgina is trying to re-capture a success that wasn’t hers in the first place, using those same connections even with Harvey gone. I may not hold her accountable for Harvey’s actions, but I also don’t think that she’s owed any success or second chances, especially since even now she’s not standing on her own 2 feet.

      • VirgiliaCoriolanus says:

        But she also almost left him because of him raping someone else, in 2015. The story was that if they decided to press charges, she was going to leave…….if not she stayed. So she stayed.

        I don’t doubt that he didn’t also treat her like crap/as disposable….but she chose to stay with as much evidence as she was ever going to get right in her face.

      • organica says:

        She’s a liar. She knew in 2014 and decided against divorce because no charges were filed. Nasty self-centered revisionist is it safe to come out now little liar.

      • tealily says:

        Exactly this. It’s complicated. And I don’t exactly blame her for marshalling the connections she has at this point to keep her business afloat, but well… it feels weird. Even her answers here make it sound like she’s more upset about the optics of what’s going on that the actual implosion of her marriage. I do have sympathy because I’m sure what she’s going through is awful and she was married to a monster, but he was so very publicly a bully and a pig… there’s no way she didn’t know he was a bully and a pig. I hope she is able to build a nice life for herself away from that marriage for the kids’ sake, but really I’m sure she’ll be just fine financially.

    • kate says:

      Let’s not put Georgina and her kids in the same category, shall we? They knew nothing, she.. Well.

      • Umyeah says:

        So i have reading about HW trading sexual favors for roles for years however i never heard rumours of sexual assault. I think Chapman knew her husband was cheating but i doubt she knew about the assaults. Also please kerp in mind Marchesa was around before she married HW and many women not associated HW have worn their dedigns. I refuse to punish a women for a mans actions without proof that they were involved.

      • Bridget says:

        You’ll want to read more then, since Marchesa’s major funding came from Weinstein connections. He is intrinsically linked to the success of that brand.

      • Umyeah says:

        @bridget you are still punishing a woman for the actions of others. I have hard time doing that

      • Bridget says:

        I’m not punishing her at all. I am however saying that she is not owed anything professionally, especially knowing the role Harvey played in Marchesa.

      • Umyeah says:

        @bridget thata fair. Maybe the best option for Chapman and her business partner is it start a brand new label, fresh start with no association to HW.

      • Bridget says:

        Marchesa was never organically successful. It was a brand that was built entirely on its red carpet exposure and Harvey’s connections. Was Georgina complicit in Harvey’s bullying? We’ll never know. But this is a tainted brand, to its very core, and Chapman has chosen NOT to start fresh and stand on what talent she may possess. It just feels so icky and entitled to me, and while I certainly don’t hold her accountable for Harvey’s serial sexual assaults, I can’t get behind this narrative either.

    • Clare says:

      No. You are comparing victims of assault to a woman who benefited from that assault, knowingly or otherwise. Please don’t compare apples to oranges.

      • Aren says:

        Absolutely. Georgina wasn’t a victim, and in the worse case scenario, she also took advantage of her husband’s victims.

      • Ankhel says:

        Aren, you don’t know that for sure. Women often deny/explain away abuse. They don’t want to appear as victims, or have people say “I told you so.” Few violent, bullying misogynists make terrific husbands.

      • Sophia's side eye says:

        Ankhel, youre entitled to your opinion, but are we now ascribing abuse to a person, who has made no mention of being abused, in order to excuse her for what she supposedly didn’t know? Harvey has dozens and dozens of actual victims, it makes me very uncomfortable to attach that label to Georgina when she’s never said she was abused. This is what she says in this very article: “I had what I thought was a very happy marriage. I loved my life.”

        I don’t blame her for Harvey’s actions. I do blame her for acting so obtuse and continually trying to foist Marchesa on his victims and the public when it is inexorably attached to the abuse, harassment and rape of women. She bothers me because she is so insensitive to his victims.

      • QueenB says:

        This. Where was Georgina believing women when her husband was first accused?

      • Ankhel says:

        I’m not saying she’s a victim of abuse, but I’m not saying she wasn’t either. We can’t know, is my point. It’s right there in my words. I suspect Weinstein lied to her, manipulated her, yelled at her, told her she’d be nothing without him, that he owned her and Marchesa. That would suit his persona. But he may have put her on a pedestal, and treated her well. That’s possible too.

    • ORIGINAL T.C. says:

      Believing victims vs believing a potential complicit person who benefitted financially are apples and oranges. This is a particular blind spot with White Feminism. We ask society to treat women as equals, to be seen as capable humans with intelligence and agency. Yet at the same time, we should consider see all White Women as fragile creatures who are victims in every marriage until otherwise proven differently.

      This is how Ivanka Trump, Kellyann Conway, Melania Trump and every woman in the Trump administration was initially treated by women who claim to be feminists.

      Separate issue from systemic rape, sexual abuse and coercion of women who come forward to make their *own* claim (using their own agency) and are not believed, their stories not investigative or being fired.

      • QueenB says:

        “Yet at the same time, we should consider see all White Women as fragile creatures who are victims in every marriage until otherwise proven differently.”
        Ding ding ding. I mentioned below how often white women will use tears strategically.

        Is really no one noticing how OBVIOUS Scarletts choice of dress is on one day later we get this? Come on. This is clearly a PR campaign. Not a creative one but I am sure it will work.

      • Bridget says:

        Considering the amount of control that Wintour wields over the Met Gala, that dress didn’t coincidentally land in front of Scarlett. It was a deliberate match being made, and part of a larger PR campaign.

    • CamoTime says:

      AGREED. Georgina is not a rapist. She should not be nailed to the wall for her husbands atrocities.

  6. Bridget says:

    Georgina’s working on a comeback. She’s positioning herself as a plucky survivor, and conveniently shaping the narrative.

    No, you didn’t offer any Marchesa gowns because you didn’t want the humiliation of being shut down by everyone. Marchesa was built on Weinstein’s bullying and connections. Georgina isn’t owed success or a second chance, no matter who she asks to put in a good word (looking at you, Wintour).

    • imqrious2 says:


      “I had what I thought was a very happy marriage. I loved my life.” Asked if she was ever suspicious about his behavior, she says, “Absolutely not. Never.” ”

      I call BULLSH!T. Sorry, but if even a peon-layperson like me knew/heard about HW, there is no way in hell she didn’t know *something*. She’s never Googled?? She never heard gossip around her? Please Bish…take several seats and STHD.

      The ONLY ones I feel bad for are the kids. They certainly don’t deserve ANY of this. I hope she got *them* to a therapist!

      • QueenB says:

        This. Such BS. It was always openly talked about how Harvey was a bully. Everyone in Hollywood that talked about him in the wake of MeToo talked about how everyone knew Harvey was a bully. Those werent rumours or an open secret it was openly talked about ( so many writers and directors complained about him) and he kind of liked that image.
        It was his image in the media that guy that fought with everyone on set, that had screaming matches, threatened people etc. Him and Scott Rudin were the two huge rage monsters in Hollywood.

      • Bridget says:

        Harvey stories were legendary prior to all of the allegations coming to light. He’s an awful bully – in every way possible. He’s physically assaulted people, applied career pressure, yelled at them. AWFUL. And the stories are out there, for her to not know means that she actively avoided them. Georgina liked the success and didn’t want to know how the sausage was made.

    • LAK says:

      What Bridget said.

      Let’s not forget that his closest public friends eg Clooney, Damon, Affleck have all said that they thought he was an incorrigible cheater who tried it on with every woman everywhere regardless of occasion or company.

      Let’s not forget that Georgina was an actress before she was a designer, and was in several Harvey films the year they went public with their romance – bear in mind the film cycle to know that it wasn’t serendipity that she appeared in her first Harvey film the same year her label launched AND scored the first big celebrity – Renee Zellweger.

      His work bullying practises were legendary. Going back decades before he met her.

      There were several stories that he bullied people at her company and she always smoothed ruffled feathers after the fact.

      Then there is this unexpectedly revealing sentence,” the first article was about a time long before I’d ever met him, so there was a minute where I couldn’t make an informed decision.” I guess if it all happened before they met she was ok with it if it had gone no further just as she was ok with the 2015 Model assault as long as police charges didn’t materialise.

    • Aren says:

      I can’t believe she has the audacity to try to make herself happen.

    • Asiyah says:

      Agreed, Bridget.

    • what's inside says:

      Totally agree.

  7. adastraperaspera says:

    Image laundering.

  8. Delon says:

    But so how Oprah, Meryl and others are responsible for Pigsteins behavior?………..I see having a pretty face really do ease you through life.

  9. Birdix says:

    She doesn’t own her husband’s mistakes. That said, he made her business. And try to shrug him off to make more money in that same business without acknowledging his role seems, well, naive is a nice word for it.

  10. QueenB says:

    Fluff piece. Any real journalist would have asked harder questions. She 100% profited from Harvey bullying actresses. While else would they suddenly wear her stuff?
    If she knew about the sex crimes is not relevant because we will never know that and the threatening of actresses to wear the dresses is more than enough to cancel her.

    Im really disappointed in the women that reached out to her to wear something because thats really not the sign that needs to be sent.

    I do feel bad for the children.

    I hope as a society we can have a discussion about how white women tears are used as weapon to hurt other women and make the perpetrator into the victim.

    • Sophia's side eye says:

      Right! Are those same people, who reached out to her, also reaching out to any of Harvey’s victims? Doubtful.

      I’m not trying to blame any woman for his actions. But where are your priorities when your first move is trying to help out a woman who directly benefitted from her husbands bullying and harassment? Especially if these are actresses, as it was mostly actresses who were forced to wear her line.

  11. violet says:

    Of course, dear. And I am the reincarnation of Catherine the Great.

  12. FHMom says:

    Georgina, nobody thinks you’re a victim but you. As my dad always said, lie down with dogs, wake up with fleas.

    • Umyeah says:

      If you read what the article she specifically says she is not the victim

      • Anners says:


      • Anners says:

        She did specifically say she wasn’t a victim, but I really felt there was an undertone of hoping that someone else would say it for her.

      • FHMom says:

        It’s the undertone. Has anybody called her a victim? I think she’s hoping that someone will so that she can put on a brave face and rebrand herself. It’s better for her brand that she’s a victim than a complicit wife.

  13. Amelie says:

    I feel bad for her to an extent, especially with how the heck does she explain this to her children. They are young, but I think old enough to understand something really bad happened.

    But the stories about Weinstein were around for years. There’s no way she could not have known. Did she think she was different from other women and the one to “tame” him? Did she just brush them off as rumors from “jealous people”? She was definitely aware of his bad temper though. Even if she didn’t know about the sexual misconduct, Weinstein mistreated his staff at Miramax, constantly yelling and berating them. She can’t pretend to be unaware of that. Did she think being married to that kind of person was ok?? And also forcing actresses to wear Marchesa. She can’t have thought it was a coincidence that actresses who were in Miramax movies were wearing her terrible designs. So while she can say she had no idea he was sexually assaulting women for years, his temper and forcing actresses to wear Marchesa are two things she hasn’t answered for and I’m having a hard time she can say “I had no idea” to both of those.

    • Neelyo says:

      Exactly. She may not have witnessed sexual assault but she was perfectly fine with the bullying and terrible behavior. And because their marriage involved their businesses, I’m sure she bore witness to that.

      She was ‘perfectly happy’ being married to a bully until she found out he was a rapist too.

  14. Ib says:

    Hammer, nail, about Wintour helping herself

  15. Millenial says:

    I really have no thoughts on whether she knew or didn’t know. I lean more towards willful ignorance, but whatever. I do think she should have waited another season before trying all this. I, for one, do not outright hate most Marchesa pieces. But Scarlett’s gown was fugly prom. If you are going to make a comeback, do it with a better gown.

  16. Toc says:

    Maybe she didn’t know everything. But something she knew. If me, that lives in another country heard all the gossip about Weinstein years ago, I have a really hard time believing that she didn’t know about his actions, at least to a certain extent. She just didn’t care, because she was proffiting of it. And now she is distancing herself from him because there is no way of him coming back. If there was any chance of a second chance for him, she would be waiting to pose on his arms again on red carpets.

    • VirgiliaCoriolanus says:

      Yeaaa….at the very least, I heard that a) actresses slept with him for roles (which was always framed as their choice vs. coercion, if not outright rape that actually occurred), and b) to get in his films, you had to wear Marchesa because it was his wife’s brand. I heard the Marchesa stuff the most frequently, and just got a general vibe that he was a bully.

      He just seems like a gross bully who wields his power like a toddler. I heard one story on here, about him deliberately eating with his hands and getting food everywhere, etc…and I could totally see it.

  17. Chloeee says:

    I’m willing to give her the benefit of the doubt. I won’t completely keep my eye off her and she should probably go with a more reputable journalistic outlet who will ask her more tough questions but I can believe she willfully turned a blind eye thinking he was consensually gallivanting

  18. Livealot says:

    Girl, bye. You married the toad for who he was and yes that included his “power” he had and yielded. To say anything else is an insult to my intelligence and Vogue has been canceled so nothing to see here.

  19. Cat says:

    What made me extremely uncomfortable with this piece is that Jonathan Van Meter is a good journalist, at least he has handled interviews and made them interesting.. but this is just “Georgina the British, plucky, gorgeous, businesswoman, mother, wronged wife who’s just a victim and can’t stop crying, innocent, woman.” She knows she has to buy a farm in Upstate NY for her children because they love riding and animals, David Oyelowo is her close friend, Karen Elson also vouches for her…it’s just so much privilege and navel gazing in one piece. She tries to save face and talk about the victims and who she married, but she’s just trying to save her line. And what really drives the point home is AW’s editor letter. The profile is so long that ir reads like a cover story. Although thank God they put Rihanna there.

  20. Mabs A'Mabbin says:

    If her words are truly coming from an earnest place, she needs to step up. Everything y’all are saying is true…her brand was built on his disgusting greasy hairy criminal back. Instead of weeping tears of innocence and non-compliance, her company should formally sever any and all ties to that beast. It needs rebranding, renaming and a complete overhaul illustrating her commitment to women. A percentage of annual revenues should go to some organized effort benefiting the beast’s victims and/or victims of sexual abuse and rape in general.

    • Mia4s says:

      Exactly on the rebranding. My genuine question would be even if you’re a fan of the line, even if you truly believe she’s an innocent victim…why in the world would you want to wear a dress that sends everyone’s first thought to one place: serial rapist?

      It would be YEARS before even just mentioning the brand won’t bring up thoughts and stories of the serial sexual abuser and bullying. Miramax put out some great movies, doesn’t mean I don’t cringe now at their title card.

      Besides…if she’s as truly skilled and talented and wonderful as her friends say, she should be able to succeed with a new brand no problem right?…right? 😒

    • Bridget says:

      It speaks volumes to me that she’s chosen to stay with the Marchesa brand.

  21. Moon says:

    She can afford a therapist, nice getaways and have her comeback featured in vogue. No sympathies from me. Nor do I buy her story.

  22. Bliss 51 says:

    When you live in Podunk and read the stories long long ago . . .

  23. Andreia says:

    Good for her. She has a life to live and shouldn’t be held down for Harvey’s crimes. I would say the same for any mother, wife, sister and daughter. She did not participate at least I have not heard any stories where she lured any women to him. I don’t care about Harvey “bullying” actress to wear her dresses. This is business and most transactions are a negotiation. You help me out, I’ll help you out. It happens in every industry. Famous people get free shit all the time. Why do you think designer brands give them free shit. So they wear it, have photos taken and make it popular. You honestly think movie studios, stylists and fashion houses don’t have agreements and aren’t pushing certain brands. Think about it…all the sudden Gucci is everywhere and everyone is wearing it, taking pictures and some of it is ugly. Now its Fendi’s turn. Everyone should take moment and watch some celebrity Instagram videos, especially when their unwrapping “gifts” from other celebrities. They do that to create hype. You help me out, i’ll help you out. Rihanna, J-lo, Kim K. They all do this.

    • LAK says:

      No one’s career was ruined for refusing to wear Gucci…..c’est la différence!!!

    • Mia4s says:

      “You help me out, I’ll help you out. It happens in every industry.“

      Oh please. What about “wear my wife’s mediocre designs or I will make huge problems for your career” is the equivalent to what you wrote above? Why would you try to minimize Weinstein’s behaviour? Go and read the link in the second comment. This profile is an utter joke.

      “Georgina…did you ever have any suspicions?”

      “*SOB*, no never!”…well except for that time everyone knows about where a model publicly accused him of sexual assault but well, I was busy and hopefully no one remembers that so don’t bring that contradiction up in the article. 🙄

      I can’t decide if she’s complicit or just a complete f**king moron. Either way, no thanks.

      • Sid says:

        Your last sentence made me laugh! I think she’s both. Men like harvey choose these privileged rich women for a reason and it’s not for their intelligence. It’s all very downton abbey esque, find a good husband and live that life.

    • QueenB says:

      “I don’t care about Harvey “bullying” actress to wear her dresses. This is business and most transactions are a negotiation. You help me out, I’ll help you out.”
      Like “if you sleep with me I’ll get you a role and if not you’ll never be an actress”?

      Seriously. He threatened womens careers. Thats as much as a negation as “Pay me or I’ll break your legs”.

      But you are right in one thing: It happens across all industries.

  24. Winniecoopersmom says:

    I want to have respect for her after all of this, but I just don’t. Her saying she’s naive about who he is would be like Melania saying she’s naive about DT. (Not saying DT and HW are equal offenders, but you get my point.)

    If I were coaching her for a comeback, I would say get out of the dress business, sell it/shut it down and start a completely new business. Marchesa will always have the HW name attached to it. It will always be stained with those horrific stories of him and his reputation. She has plenty enough money and contacts to pursue anything else if she wanted to. Not sure why she is still hanging on to this train going nowhere. She needs a better publicist and a willingness to let go.

    • Aren says:

      Yes, I don’t know why she’s so desperate to save something that she knows was built on the pain and suffering of many people.

  25. Aren says:

    So she says one part of her was “naive”, I wonder, what was the other part?

  26. Jussie says:

    She knew. I personally find it highly doubtful that she didn’t know the whole time, but we do know for sure that as of 2015 she was fully aware that he was a sexual predator. She knew and she made a calculated choice to stay and continue to let him rape and bully his way into making her garbage fashion brand successful.

    She’s trash, and it’s disgusting that Wintour has given her a platform to blatantly lie like this.

  27. Kristen says:

    Not buying it.

  28. Sid says:

    Doing an interview with vogue was a big mistake. Like the yashar Ali article, she needed o be asked the hard questions, not in a blame accusatory way but to realise how she benefited and her got advantages from her privilege.

    I don’t doubt she is hurting and there is a element of truth. But it’s BS about being completely in the dark. Wouldn’t it serve her better to tell the truth and say yes I knew he was unfaithful but I accept in marriages and business like this that’s how it works but I would never have imagined he could be a rapist. I wonder who’s advising her?

    There’s a element of Stockholm syndrome here. I feel she’s still scared of him for some reason. I’m Indian and my cousins in India have had arranged marriages where you end up falling in love or have an attachment to you spouse especially as you have children, I find the psychology of this fascinating. I think the insightful thing from this article is what Neil Gaiman said: he could be wonderful to her and the kids so I can’t fault her for wanting to protect her kids and seeing the good father side and how will she explain that to her kids.

    One thing I struggle with is that when people say she knew, I always create the scenario of well what could she have done? If someone went up to her and said he did this to me, how does de resolve this and become a hero in that moment for abused women? Does she threaten to expose him and leave? He would destroy her and I think she knows that. A long time ago as a teenager I was waiting at the bus stop with lots of people and a couple with a baby were arguing with another couple and second couple said they rape their baby. We were all stunned and didn’t know what to do or say. I still am haunted about it and wonder should I have gone to the police, what if it was true, what if it wasn’t. What could I have done in that moment. Should I and the rest of the people at that bus stop be held responsible or be complicit? And harvey was a powerful and dangerous man so I can imagine she felt threatened if she did or said anything.

    I went from giving her the benefit of the doubt to hating her to going slightly easy on her and playing devils advocate again. Whilst I don’t feel sorry for her and think this vogue piece is absurd and clearly a cunning feel sorry for me so I become a top fashion designer again article, I don’t think she is this evil being without a soul and can imagine she went through hell with him as well.

    It would’ve been better she told the brutal truth even is she came across as a baddie in that. Because then at least they could’ve painted a redemption story. There’s going to be rightful backlash about this, so I hope she has no choice but to forget all this falseness and is forced to tell the truth.

    • LAK says:

      There are 2 key points in the Yashar Ali article

      1. 2 women say that Weinstein made misogynist remarks to them infront of Chapman who didn’t react at all.

      2. The author suspects that Chapman signed an NDA and thus can’t really discuss any of this in detail.

      Both points do not reflect well on her at this point.

  29. Miss Gloss says:

    She is not a good person if she married Weinstein…period. While no one should have to endure the things Harvey did, she was in that marriage for her own reasons and she knew her husband bullied actresses to wear her ugly shit. No way she didn’t.

  30. ShadyQueen says:

    If Chapman didn’t make another dime she’d be just fine. She also has the money and connections to start another venture or take Marquesa in another direction so nah, I don’t feel like she’s being punished by the public.

    My most generous reading is that she was willingly married to a creepy lecherous bully whose terrible behaviors benefitted her so so business.

    The same connections she’s leveraging to put her low rent gowns on the red carpet are the same ones she could have used to leave him.

  31. Pixie says:

    For the love of ugly dresses is she serious? Sit down. Note her wording on how she thought they had a happy marriage and she ‘loved her life’. Yeah the fancy trips, the red carpets, the giant Hampton house etc. Harvey at one point was king, he snapped his fat fingers and the doors opened. That is what she loved. She didn’t marry him because he was a caring lover, doting father or adoring husband. She wouldn’t have looked twice at him or turned a blind eye if he was some broke accountant. We are to believe she heard none of the rumblings? She choose not to hear them. Because of her ‘life’. She wouldn’t have Blake Lively wearing her awful dress on the red carpet. She wouldn’t have the NYC brownstone. The private schools for the kids. The helicopter or private jets. She has zero right to even act like she gives a damn about the victims. It’s insulting and disgusting and she should be held accountable at least in the court of public opinion along with the Weinstein supervisors who allowed it to happen. You can’t be serious that she knew nothing about his behavior their entire marriage. She’s crying for herself and herself alone. Anyone who would willingly marry that pig and plead ignorance deserves this reversal of fortune. I feel for her children. That is all. No child deserves to have that man’s legacy cloud their future and I hope they can somehow rise above it. Georgina should take this time to reflect on what material things or status symbols were so important to her that she willingly married this excuse for a man. That is what needs discussing. Not her whimpering about her great life.

    • Jaded says:

      Very well stated Pixie, I agree. She was HW’s girlfriend for years before they married and she knew full well what a monster he could be, but he afforded her a level of commercial and social success that she wouldn’t have otherwise attained without his help. In once sense she enabled his behaviour because her tacit compliance in order to achieve success, despite the enormous amount of evidence of his crimes against women, was more important to her than admitting she’d married a monster.

  32. Marianne says:

    Ok, I believe that she truly didnt know just how bad the situation was (the rapes, exposing himself to actresses etc). She probably knew he was a cheat and that he said sexist things. Fine. But I also dont think shes completely innocent about the actresses having to wear Marchesa. Not only do I think she knew, Im sure that was a part of her deal to turning a blind eye to his philandering ways.

  33. tearose11 says:

    I can’t blame her for his crimes.

    Did she know?

    That is a complicated issue.

    She may have well been bullied, gaslighted herself. Which I wouldn’t put past a man like Weinstein. Maybe she was in love with him in the beginning, you know someone as powerful as him would be able to sweep a lot of people off their feet with a lavish Hollywood lifestyle. But I also think she must have known that their marriage would be advantageous to her.

    And I’m sorry if I had a boyfriend or husband who knew people, I’d use the connections, too. I suspect a lot of people who are side-eyeing her for that would do the same. Also when you marry into that type of fame, you don’t necessarily have to go look for people to give you business, some people will pander to you so they can get into you, or your family’s good books. That is how business works, it’s who you know. So I can’t blame her for using his connections to further the Marchesa brand.

    Did she know that Weinstein was bullying people into wearing her gowns?

    Again, I don’t know. He might have framed the incidents in a way that she felt the actresses were clamouring to wear her designs. Some of the women forced to wear her dresses probably were also in too scared themselves (of Weinstein) to tell her outright they didn’t want anything to do with Marchesa. There would be a lot of intimidation behind the scenes that Weinstein did which may not have been visible to her. I think he was enough of a bully that she failed to acknowledge it or understand it fully, sort of going into a shocked state of mind where you go along with things even though you know there’s something wrong, but your mind shuts down to protect yourself as a defense mechanism.

    You know domestic abuse partners go and bail out their own abusers, right?

    I think that is what happened with her.

    And I think that it happened for so long that she just lived with it.

    Or it could be a very slow awakening for her. We just don’t know.

    The Vogue piece comes off as slightly too kiss-assy for sure. And the other article is right in some cases, but as I personally think she was also one of his victims, and she is probably just coming to terms with it all herself.

    That doesn’t diminish any of Weinstein’s victims though. And I hope at some point Chapman will be prepared to say more about them other than talking about her childhood and flowers on her desk.

    There are other people involved in Marchesa, designers, seamstresses, etc. and if her trying to start the label again helps them, then why not? The dresses are hideous, so I’m not sure if they will ever really succeed, but if they want to try, good for them. I don’t know if she should concentrate so much in Hollywood again though, might be better if they went a different route and rebranded themselves as something else because as a brand the name Marchesa is going to be forever associated with that ugly man Weinstein.

    I don’t have the money to buy anything designer and even if I did I wouldn’t buy the ice skating outfits they make, but hey if someone else actually likes them, let them enjoy wearing it.

    Fow now, I think I’m giving her a pass.

    • Asiyah says:

      “She may have well been bullied, gaslighted herself.”

      Valid point.

      • tearose11 says:

        I really think she was, because he was such a abusive as*hole that there is no way she was spared any of his tantrums. Abused people are afraid for themselves and their children and while they might be aware of things, they are mentally unable to do anything. Honestly I think she was manipulated by him to an alarming degree.

  34. MoAnne says:

    Her story might work better if there wasn’t a woman that accused Harvey of awful behavior that made the front page news in NYC. And, the police even investigated it! Then, there’s all those Hollywood rumors. And, how did those gowns magically appear on all those celebs? Was it your brilliant designs or was it Harvey? Nope. Doesn’t pass the smell test. She used him to get herself a designer career. As long as celebs wore her clothes.

    Now, to be sure, she’s not to blame for his actions. Nope. But, she should launch a completely new designer label and keep a low profile for awhile. This interview is doing her no favors.

  35. Bridget says:

    Does anyone actually believe that actresses were requesting for Marchesa for the red carpet?

  36. Sunny says:

    Interesting the part when she’s asked if she had a happy marriage: she “loved her life” but said nothing about ever loving him, it’s about the kids and the lifestyle (no surprise!).
    It’s got to have a more challenging element if you’re actually, deeply in love with a man then blindsided by such criminal, evil behaviour.

  37. Nan says:

    Aw, when gold-digging doesn’t work out. Boo hoo.

  38. Blackbetty says:

    Pretty hard to believe she didn’t know, when I had heard about Harvey Weinstein on the other side of the world for Christ sake!

  39. Lilith says:

    She was never suspicious?? BS. Total and utter BS. That’s where she lost me completely.

  40. sunshine gold says:

    Everyone who came into contact with Harvey Weinstein knew he was an asshole. Even Jennifer Lawrence and Matt Damon and people like that who didn’t experience the sexual harassment still knew he was an asshole. So his wife of 10 years NEVER saw his true self….OK maybe she didn’t see the terrifying rape monster, but the bullying, shaming, intimidating, yelling, abusing, lying, cheating, conniving, cruelty, retaliation, hostility? She had a perfectly happy life with this disgusting, vicious, damaged human being? It really is hard to buy.

  41. Zee says:

    She knew. It was and he was “too out there” for her not to.

    Maybe she didn’t know all the details about the alleged rapes but AT THE VERY LEAST, she knew he was a bully, a misogynistic and most probably a cheater (so would or could potentially coerce women into having sex with him) but she stayed because it was convenient for HER and her business.

    We seriously need to stop being “oh so nice” and start holding other women accountable for their role in perpetuating misogyny.
    Call out their bullshit.
    Let’s be (and get) real and stop looking for excuses, just because they are women.

    Women can also be misogynistic and greatly contribute to misogyny and no, they don’t get to play the “I’m a woman” card whenever is ONLY convenient for them!

  42. Beer&Crumpets says:

    I don’t know shit about fashion or her line, or how successful her line is or isn’t or where that success may have come from.

    What I do know about (much more than I would like) is how being involved with a vicious psycho can, does, and will fuck with a normal person’s head. I don’t know what she knew or when she knew it, but I would bet all my money that whatever she thought, whatever she suspected, she talked herself out of with an awful lot of help from the people around her- and not just her piece of shit rapist husband, either. My situation was nowhere near as far-reaching or destructive- obviously. But it still sucked pretty hard, and I had a very hard time reconciling the fact that I fell for a completely awful person. Mostly, I think, because of what that must say about ME and the kind of person, the kind of woman, the kind of mother *I* must be to have gone along, to have been taken in, to have bought the shitty bill of goods that I bought.

    I have mixed feelings about what she said, too. I don’t want to let anyone off the hook, here. I think everyone involved should burn. But I can’t not have a bit of compassion for this woman, because god knows I have turned a blind fucking eye in my day, too- to my eternal shame. It’s hard to live with. It took me a while. Maybe eventually she will unpack all of this and be able to take ownership of what parts – if any- are hers and what parts she can put down. I hope she can. She probably won’t ever feel good or even ok about it…. I don’t. But I’m not lying to myself anymore and never will again, and I don’t hate myself. That’s enough.

    • Rachel in August says:

      I know this a day or two old now, but I just briefly read a very good article in The Globe & Mail (Toronto) about how everyone in Hollywood knew about him, everyone. They just kept quiet of of fear. And his enablers? The same, if only to keep the awards rolling in. I found it disturbing. “Everyone in Hollywood knew he was a sexual predator and used his position to put women into compromising sexual situations.” I do wonder what she knew herself. The body language in their picture together is formal and cold. That’s only a trophy wife you see there.

  43. RabbitOne says:

    Am I the only one who has not thought about her, cared about what she knew or did not or even how she is coping now? I just don’t care. She has no place in this tragedy for me for some reason. There is the rapist and his victims. That is the story and the thing I care about. Everyone else fades into the background.

  44. Sid says:

    Have Rose McGowan or Asia Argento gone after her on twitter? It’d be interesting to hear their view. Another of Harvey’s victims Lauren Sivan is sticking up for Georgina.

  45. j says:

    rape and fashion in one interview? gross.