‘Why Does Russell Crowe Get The Benefit Of The Doubt?’…A fan responds to defend.

Over the last couple of weeks I have read a lot about Russell Crowe and what allegedly happened in a hotel suite one weekend in October, 2016 in Beverly Hills, California.

So it was with interest I read an article in an Australian newspaper, The Sydney Morning Herald by a journalist/columnist Naomi Chainey who asks the question ‘Why does Russell Crowe get the benefit of the doubt over Azealia Banks?’ published on 21 October, 2016. The Sydney Morning Herald is a newspaper based in Russell Crowe’s adopted home town Sydney, Australia. The article to be honest has bothered me.

The journalist/columnist formed the opinion based on reading comments sections of I assume of a variety of media that “Crowe appears to have been gifted the benefit of the doubt, while Banks' version of events is being denounced as the crazy ramblings of an habitual attention seeker."

She then goes on to state “Frankly, it's an excellent example of public opinion being shaped by the perception filter of white patriarchy – because, really, how else can the adamantly assumed innocence of a man with a long history of violent outbursts over mild slights be explained? Violent physical and verbal altercations are hardly outside Crowe's repertoire, but this is conveniently forgotten in the face new accusations from a young black woman with a mouthy reputation.

Witnesses (Crowe's friends) back his version of events, but as Banks describes Crowe dropping the n-bomb subtly, and any alleged spitting and choking may have occurred out of view as he manhandled her out of the room, there's certainly room to believe either party here.

But whilst Crowe's history of physical violence appears to have no bearing on how his actions are perceived, Banks' history of inappropriate tweeting is apparently proof positive that she is not to be trusted…

I won't defend Banks' use of homophobic and racist slurs or her habit of wishing graphically described violence upon public figures who offend her; but when one person's behaviour is considered a permanent mark against their character, and another can operate free of prejudice regardless of their past, surely we must note the double standard.”

The journalist/columnist then goes on to attempt to disprove this gift.

“Frankly, it's an excellent example of public opinion being shaped by the perception filter of white patriarchy – because, really, how else can the adamantly assumed innocence of a man with a long history of violent outbursts over mild slights be explained?”

“Public opinion or being shaped by white patriarchy”…Being Australian and following Russell Crowe on Twitter and for fans we don’t need to be reminded about who Russell Crowe is. Yet prior to this incident people like me would have asked who is Azealia Banks and yes I used Google to find out. It is not double standards to assume that people know about who they are reading about or can find out using Google.

It is interesting this journalist/columnist made allegations against Russell Crowe of having physical and verbal altercations without referring to any direct evidence in her article or doing any substantial research from quality sources expected from a journalist/columnist who writes for a well-respected newspaper in Australia. The decision of whether a reader wanted to know about Russell Crowe’s past history was left up to the reader to follow links two to articles or just left to make assumptions and believe her because she was a journalist/columnist with a well-respected newspaper.

When I followed the links provided they are to articles from dubious and biased sources such as celebrity gossip webpages, feminist webpage and the Daily Mail newspaper in UK all written and researched by young women. According to one site she provided a link to the article titled ‘A timeline of Russell Crowe’s history of violent outburst’ by Janelle James (who happens to be African American) at revelist.com there were a total of 6 alleged physical and verbal outbursts between 1988 and 2016 the last one being over 11 years ago, which was the famous phone throwing incident. People are usually presumed innocent until proven guilty under the law in Australia and America.

The journalist/columnist states “In attempting to be true to herself and refusing to play the game of politeness and compliance…With all this in mind, it's easy to see how being told to "pipe down" might have been the last straw for Azealia Banks on Saturday night. As someone with an expressed awareness of the tedious, ongoing silencing that comes with oppression, Banks may, in that moment, simply have reached her limit”. I would be interested to know where Azealia Banks thought she was going on that night with RZA. Yes, Russell Crowe and his friends are white and are old enough to be her father.

While I don’t know anything about African American culture, I do know about Anglo-Saxon culture in Australia, the culture in which Russell Crowe has spent much of his life in. It would be considered rude and disrespectful to walk into an older person’s home and start criticising their choice on anything. Anyone who knows anything about Russell Crowe and follows him on Twitter, knows he has a wide taste in music which he regularly shares with his followers. The journalist/columnist states “Banks arrived at the event as a plus one, laughed at the music choices, called Crowe and one of his guests "boring white men" and was told by an unnamed female guest to "pipe down".

There are also several other things about this story. I don’t think Russell Crowe would get physical with anyone unless he thought there was a genuine threat. From past experience Russell has learned that being aggressive in the US could not only be expensive, if charged and found guilty may result in jail time but also in never being able to work in the US again. While Russell continues to be married to an Australian which allows him certain rights, and to the best of my knowledge he is not a resident or a citizen of Australia. If Russell was charged with a criminal offence he may have to declare it every time he came back through customs as a New Zealander visiting Australia. That would certainly make it uncomfortable coming back to Australia and he may even be refused entry or the ability to work.

The journalist/columnist states “Witnesses (Crowe's friends) back his version of events, but as Banks describes Crowe dropping the n-bomb subtly, and any alleged spitting and choking may have occurred out of view as he manhandled her out of the room, there's certainly room to believe either party here”. It was reported in the media Russell said the N word and was reported as saying that he was racist. I have lived most of my life in Australia and I have never heard an Australian or a New Zealander use the N word. Australians do have a collection of racist words for a large group of minorities who live there, but the N word is not one of them. As a consequence I doubt it would be part of his vocabulary, even though it is well known he has African American friends.

From everything I know about Russell and one of them is I don’t believe he is racist and is actually quite the opposite. His actions at South’s rugby league club he part owns in Australia support those claims through who the club contracts as players, to the history and tradition of supporting Indigenous people in the team and local community. It would be very hard to be a racist sporting club employee or owner in Australia, for as long he has without it being found out and reported.

Finally, it is interesting what I have found out about Russell Crowe using Twitter. My understanding of Russell is he is a family man who loves his children, a talented and critically acclaimed actor, passionate sports enthusiast, a generous, loyal and supportive friend, smokes and drinks, likes a good time and likes the ladies in particular young pretty blondes. He is a wheeler and dealer, supports any sporting team over an Australian sporting team and is still a Kiwi despite living in Australia in for many years. He also plays guitar and sings a bit. For anyone who follows Russell on Twitter knows he has an interest in lots of different music which he shares with his followers. He is also known to have volatile temper and frequently uses the f word. To his credit Russell Crowe shared on his official Twitter site articles that supported his statement and moved on.

The journalist/columnist talks about Azealia Banks Twitter use “Azealia Banks has cultivated a reputation for picking fights with the press, politicians and her fellow artists. The controversial rapper has both gathered fans and fame and turned many off with her brash contrarianism and tendency to take Twitter trolling too far”. Ten days on Azealia Banks is still talking about this to anyone who will listen followed up by the release of new music.

No copyright infringement intended on these articles. 

“Why does Russell Crowe get the benefit of the doubt over Azealia Banks?” by Naomi Chainey published in the Sydney Morning Herald on 21 October, 2016.

Azealia Banks has cultivated a reputation for picking fights with the press, politicians and her fellow artists. The controversial rapper has both gathered fans and fame and turned many off with her brash contrarianism and tendency to take Twitter trolling too far.

But now it seems she's finally questioning whether cultivating a self-described "crazy girl" public image was worth it.

After an altercation with none other than Russell Crowe on Saturday night, Banks filed a police report alleging he assaulted her as he threw her out of a small gathering in his hotel suite. According to witnesses, Banks arrived at the event as a plus one, laughed at the music choices, called Crowe and one of his guests "boring white men" and was told by an unnamed female guest to "pipe down".

Banks allegedly responded by dropping n-bombs and threatening to stab people with a broken wine glass. Banks' own (very different) account suggests the wine glass comments were in jest, but all present agree that Crowe then grabbed her in a bear hug, removed her from the room, and called security. Banks claims Crowe also tried to choke her, quietly called her the n-word and spat at her. Crowe denies this. On Sunday, when Crowe refused to apologise, Banks filed a charge of battery against him with the Beverly Hills Police Department.

Now, I don't presume to know what actually happened in that suite. It's a "he said she said" situation and we only have snippets of what really occurred. What I do know – having spent last night in the grimy quagmire of comments sections – is that, generally speaking, Crowe appears to have been gifted the benefit of the doubt, while Banks' version of events is being denounced as the crazy ramblings of an habitual attention seeker.
Frankly, it's an excellent example of public opinion being shaped by the perception filter of white patriarchy – because, really, how else can the adamantly assumed innocence of a man with a long history of violent outbursts over mild slights be explained? Violent physical and verbal altercations are hardly outside Crowe's repertoire, but this is conveniently forgotten in the face new accusations from a young black woman with a mouthy reputation.

Witnesses (Crowe's friends) back his version of events, but as Banks describes Crowe dropping the n-bomb subtly, and any alleged spitting and choking may have occurred out of view as he manhandled her out of the room, there's certainly room to believe either party here.

But whilst Crowe's history of physical violence appears to have no bearing on how his actions are perceived, Banks' history of inappropriate tweeting is apparently proof positive that she is not to be trusted. I won't defend Banks' use of homophobic and racist slurs, or her habit of wishing graphically described violence upon public figures who offend her; but when one person's behaviour is considered a permanent mark against their character, and another can operate free of prejudice regardless of their past, surely we must note the double standard.

Coincidentally, news of their fight broke on the same day that the Evening Standard published an interview with Banks, who declared that "maybe it's time to stop being a crazy girl."

In the article, the rapper reflects on the backlash against her tweet war with Zayn Malik, which turned many of her fans against her. "It finally reconciled these two conflicting thoughts I had about being real and being professional," she says.

"I realised you're not keeping it real by being a crazy girl. You don't lose anything by keeping your mouth shut. So maybe it's time to stop being a crazy girl."

This moment of self-reflection illustrates a certain bind in which young women, especially young women of colour, can find themselves. In attempting to be true to herself and refusing to play the game of politeness and compliance, Banks has made a habit of shoving hard at expectations wherever they exist. Operating from a position of "f--k you and your opinion" can be liberating, but Banks now finds herself facing the consequences (perhaps unfair) of rebellion often taken too far.

To that point, it's worth noting the cultural context of Banks' more outrageous comments, as the anger she expresses so vehemently is almost always rooted in the perceived appropriation of her work or cultural identity (particularly in her public grievances with Iggy Azalea and Zayn Malik).

The problem of cultural appropriation has been explained eloquently by Hunger Games star Amandla Stenberg here (recommended watching if you haven't seen it already). Banks' frustrations over the appropriation of her music and style are legitimate, however offensively expressed, and to dismiss them as "crazy" or "attention seeking" is to embark upon a slippery slope.

Throw in the stereotype of "the angry black woman", ripped apart here by Cynthia L. Dorsey, and Banks is in a triple bind. Stay quiet about your oppression, become stuck in "respectability politics" or have your legitimate anger dismissed as an inherent "crazy" trait.

As Dorsey says "we are living in a world where my attitude discredits me no matter what I do, I might as well lay my anger out on the table for you to see."

While Banks struggles with these questions of identity and expression on a world stage, she is being judged and held to account by gendered and racialised expectations of perfection.

Unlike Crowe, Banks isn't given much room to make mistakes.

With all this in mind, it's easy to see how being told to "pipe down" might have been the last straw for Azealia Banks on Saturday night. As someone with an expressed awareness of the tedious, ongoing silencing that comes with oppression, Banks may, in that moment, simply have reached her limit.

But her response has been described by various witnesses and news outlets as a "rant", "erratic" and "an insane speech", with little attempt made to glean her perspective. She was consistently rendered unrelatable, and inherently untrustworthy, within the media narrative.

Nevertheless, Banks' conclusion that "you don't lose anything by keeping your mouth shut" may be a tad misguided. It's not a simple dichotomy of silent or "crazy" after all, and I, for one, hope this woman who deliberately defies the status quo finds a way to speak her truth.

I really don't know what happened in that hotel room. I don't know whose account is correct. But the assumptions we make about whose perspective is reliable in the absence of proof reveal our biases, and it's worth taking a minute to step back and self-reflect.

A timeline of Russell Crowe's history of violent outbursts by Janelle James published on www.revelist.com

On Sunday night (October 16), rapper Azealia Banks claimed she'd gotten into an altercation with Oscar-winner Russell Crowe in his suite at the Beverly Hills Hotel the night before.

"To recap my night, I went to a [party] at Russell Crowe's suite, at which he called me a n----r, choked me, threw me out and spat at me," Banks wrote in the now-deleted Facebook post.

"Last night was one of the hardest nights of sleep I've had in a long time."

According to TMZ Crowe invited 10 guests over to his suite for dinner and to listen to music. Banks accompanied rapper RZA to the party. Eyewitnesses explain that the trouble began when Banks started to make fun of Crowe's taste in music and called him and another guest "boring white men."

Another female attendee reportedly went to defend Crowe and insisted that Banks quiet down. Instead, Banks began threatening Crowe.

"You would love it if I broke my glass, stabbed you guys in the throat, and blood would squirt everywhere like some real Tarantino shit," Banks supposedly yelled.

TMZ reports that Banks then took her glass and cocked it back, and in response, Crowe grabbed her in a bear hug and forced her out of the hotel suite. Hotel security guards were called, and Banks was escorted off of the property.

Sources later told TMZ that Banks went to the police on Sunday after Crowe refused to apologize.

As of press time, both parties' accounts of the night aren't matching up, and details are hazy at best. While we are still finding out what really happened, we have to take into consideration that this isn't the first time that Crowe has been accused of violence. Not by a long shot.

1988: Crowe head-butts his "Blood Brothers" co-star Peter Cousens.

According to the Daily Mail, while starring with Cousens in the musical “Blood Brothers” in Sydney, Australia, Crowe got into a fight with his co-star in the dressing room.

"Yes. He was screaming at me at the time," Crowe told CBS News. "He was calling me all manner of things. And all the other cast, or the three other principle guys that I worked with or that I shared a dressing with, were holding my arms. So, that's all I had left to hit him with and he fuckin' deserved it."

November 1999: Crowe gets into a fight outside of a nightclub in Coffs Harbour, Australia.

Entertainment Weekly judge threw out the case due to a lack of evidence against the defendants.

November 13, 2002: Crowe argues with the owner of the New Zealand Warriors rugby team, Eric Watson, at a London restaurant.

Police were called to an alleged brawl at Zuma restaurant in London. The Sun reported that Crowe and Watson began arguing in the bathroom, which led to them physically fighting. The fight eventually moved to the bar area, and was then broken up by former "EastEnders" star Ross Kemp. An onlooker claimed that Crowe was apparently throwing plates like something out of the movie ‘My Big Fat Greek Wedding.’

"Police were called at 0042 GMT on 13 November to reports of an altercation involving two men believed to be in their 30s," a Metropolitan Police spokeswoman told BBC News Online. "No allegations of a crime were received, there were no injuries and there will be no further police action."

August 2004: Crowe fights his bodyguard Mark "Spud" Carroll on the set of "Cinderella Man."

According to BBC News Online, the altercation took place at a party on the set of "Cinderella Man." Crowe got upset when he thought Carroll was insinuating that something was going on between him and a female extra he had been talking to at the party. Crowe, being a married man, was offended by the accusations.

Crowe later wrote a letter to The Sunday Herald Sun saying, "The misunderstanding arose when Spud came over to tell me what he thought other people in the room might have been thinking of my conversation. Spud was passing on other people's 'perceptions' and I shot the messenger."

He continued, "It doesn't surprise me that I'm overly sensitive to gossip and speculation and heartily sick of other people's 'perceptions.'"

Carroll also discussed the situation in a separate letter to The Sunday Herald Sun. "He did take a nip at my chest — I was trying to smother him at the time, so I can understand the move," he wrote. "As for calling it a fight, believe me, we have done much more damage to each other playing touch footy."

June 2005: Crowe throws a hotel telephone and hits a hotel employee in the face.

The actor was charged and arrested in New York City for throwing a hotel phone at the Mercer Hotel's concierge. According to CNN, Crowe was booked into the First Precinct, while the victim was taken to St. Vincent's Hospital.

"This arose because he was trying to get his wife on the phone in Australia. He was in his room. He couldn't get a line and there was a disagreement," Crowe's lawyer, Gerald Lefcourt, told reporters, according to The Associated Press.

CBS News reports that he eventually pleaded guilty to third degree assault, paid a fine of $160, and reportedly paid the desk clerk a $100,000 settlement to avoid a civil lawsuit.

October 15, 2016: Crowe allegedly assaults Banks at a hotel.