On January 31st of last year, I published a blog which shared the story of my battles with sexual abuse and epilepsy growing up; the depression and suicidal thoughts which sprung from them; and how artist Marilyn Manson's interviews and music essentially saved me. Within hours of releasing that extremely personal story, actress Evan Rachel Wood published an Instagram post, which alleged Manson of multiple forms of abuse, including sexual. While it was an incredibly surreal moment for me, I refused to comment on it until both parties made their case and evidence was gathered one way or the other. Yes, call me crazy, but even as an abuse-survivor myself, while I feel every abuse allegation should be taken seriously, I'm also a staunch believer in due-process.
For the most part, Manson (real name Brian Warner) stayed mum following the allegations. Not long after Ms. Wood posted her Instagram message, he shared one of his own, where he vehemently denied all allegations. After that, though, the most you heard from him was the occasional photo of him going into public for a night out with friends. That is until very recently, where he shared all the details of a defamation lawsuit he filed against Ms. Wood and her partner, Illma Gore. In this lawsuit, where documentation was provided, it alleged the following of the two defendants:
1) "They impersonated an actual agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation by forging and distributing a fictitious letter from the agent, to create the false appearance that Warner's alleged 'victims' and their families were in danger, and that there was a federal criminal investigation of Warner ongoing."
2) "They provided checklists and scripts to prospective accusers, listing the specific alleged acts of abuse that they should claim against Warner."
3) "They made knowingly false statements to prospective accusers (which have since been repeated by those accusers in court filings), including the defamatory claim that Warner filmed the sexual assault of a minor."
4) "Gore used fake email accounts pretending to be Warner to create correspondence that she believed would be harmful to Warner and bolster the allegations against him."
5) "Gore 'swatted' Warner on or around February 3, 2021. The LAPD was notified that the FBI had received a call from a 'friend' of Warner named Illma Gore who claimed that an emergency existed because she had not been able to reach him and was concerned for his safety. This report was false."
6) "Gore hacked Warner's email login and passwords, social media login and passwords, and social security number."
7) "Gore slandered Warner."
Since then, Ms. Wood has made several appearances on talk shows, where when asked about the lawsuit, has either stated she couldn't comment or deflected. Ms. Gore, on the other hand, took to Twitter almost immediately following the lawsuit, where she posted the following pair of messages:
1) "Bring it the f*ck on you rapist pedophile motherf*cker"
2) "Before publishing images be aware that photos and images from my hard drives have been registered with U.S. Copyright office. This documentation names me as the rightful copyright owner. I have not nor will give permission to use them."
Yes, in that second tweet, she essentially admitted the documentation Manson's attorney provided in the lawsuit was legitimate; yes, she deleted the post after being called out for it; and yes, screenshots were taken and posted of it before she removed it from her page.
Since Manson filed his defamation lawsuit against Wood and Gore, multiple women have come out in his defense - either claiming he never behaved in such a manner as the two defendants allege and/or the two defendants approached them to help defame the rock singer.
I'm not going to pretend to have all the answers, because I don't. Nobody does except for the singer and the alleged victims. Having said that, though, if a person is being nonpartisan, they'd have to say Manson has presented the stronger argument to this point: an Instagram post with no documentation vs. a lawsuit with verified documentation by one of the defendants.
Who knows what will happen with all of this, as especially in the state of California, defamation lawsuits are extremely difficult to prove. One thing that can't be denied, however, is Marilyn Manson's image and brand have taken significant hits since Ms. Wood made her allegations a little over a year ago; in the social-media world, due-process isn't given due-process; and in 2022, the social-media world trumps the real world.
I think what I've found most fascinating about this case is the media's narrative. Ever since Ms. Wood's unsubstantiated allegations were posted on her Instagram page, I've read or heard media outlets make the following comments:
- "He was a monster hiding in plain sight."
- "It's always the ones you most expect."
- "The least shocking thing of his career."
- "This should have come out sooner."
- "How didn't we know?"
With the influx of 24-hour "news" networks, social-media sites, and partisan online media outlets, investigative journalism has become about as scarce as NATO Putin-supporters, so these clickbait-headlines aren't surprising, but they are disappointing. When the initial allegations against Bill Cosby were made, did the media immediately paint him as a monster? What about Harvey Weinstein? R. Kelly? ...and other celebrities who have been imprisoned for a host of sexual improprieties? Eventually, yes, but not immediately like they did with Manson. Why? That's the question I'd been struggling with until recently, and then it hit me.
April 20th of 1999 is a day that will live in infamy. Columbine. I don't need to elaborate beyond that single word and people know exactly what it is I'm talking about. On that day two high school kids shot and killed 12 of their fellow students and a teacher in what was one of the largest school mass-shootings in this country's history. Not long after the shooting, the media falsely claimed that the two perpetrators were die-hard fans of Marilyn Manson, and as politicians, church leaders, and media talking heads began to discuss the horrific tragedy, they began pointing their fingers at the shock-rocker and blaming him for the shooting. This prompted Manson to cancel the rest of his tour and become secluded, as he was fearful of leaving his home, due to the seemingly infinite death threats he had received. When all was said and done, it was discovered the shooters weren't fans of Manson and the shock-rocker came back fighting, but the damage had already been done. He's been able to find a great deal of success post-shooting, but nowhere near to the extent as before it.
Especially after reading Manson's op-ed in Rolling Stone magazine about scapegoating art and his appearance in Michael Moore's Oscar-winning documentary Bowling For Columbine, an increasing number of people began to feel sympathy for Manson. Some, especially in the media, may have even felt a tinge of guilt. While they may not have admitted it outright (Because who does that anymore?), they know they were wrong and almost destroyed a man's life as a result. Nothing can remove that dark stain from their records, but what could make them feel as though they've been able to successfully place a giant rug over that permanent, impenetrable stain? Releasing a story which proves Manson to be the danger to society they had claimed from the very beginning. Almost immediately after Ms. Wood's allegations became public, the media trounced on the opportunity to say, "Oh, oh! See?!? We told you so!" Unfortunately for them, as they obviously didn't learn the first time, if you don't research before you report, you're ripe for repercussions.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LloIWMJrefKSGZ_pfErcaOggmVIYckrd/view
Comments
Post a Comment