This one has been rolling around in my head for a while now, but I've just never gotten started. It's coming out today because I haven't heard from the sailor in days, and my back is still really painful, so I've been watching the Armie Hammer GQ interview to cheer myself up.
In 2021, allegations of sexual assault and cannibalism circulated about the actor, which led to him being dropped by his agency and cut from several films and theatre appearances. Roles in films he had already filmed were either significantly cut or re-shot, his wife divorced him, and he moved to the Cayman Islands, where he was reportedly selling time shares to make a living. He was also the subject of a three-part docuseries from Discovery+ entitled "House of Hammer".
My own sexual proclivities and love of cutting aside, it's difficult to understand why Hammer's career was so badly damaged by these kink allegations when other celebrities have been public about their sexual or romantic interest in blood. Angelina Jolie and ex-husband Billy Bob Thornton famously wore vials of each other's blood during their marriage, stating that it brought them closer as a couple, and musician Machine Gun Kelly and ex-fiance Megan Fox were known to drink each other's blood. Although it was said that this was for "ritualistic purposes" rather than sexual gratification. Why did these instances not end their careers, but not Hammer's?
There were also several allegations of sexual assault against Hammer that clearly have a connection to the discussion around his character. Allegations for which he was found not guilty by means of reasonable doubt. Putting these aside, what I don't understand is why certain kinks are tolerated by society and not others. Quentin Tarantino is well known to have a foot fetish, and many celebrities have been candid about their interest in role-play and BDSM. Mozart apparently loved rimming, if we are to believe the article I just read, the opening paragraph of the article I just read. Although as much as I enjoy it too, I was significantly happier before I knew this piece of information. Also, like, how did people know?
Mozart's love of analingus aside, when it comes to fantasies that we do not act upon, where is the line between the acceptable and the unacceptable? Why was Hammer's career effectively ended when it was suggested that he had cannibalistic fantasies, but others weren't? Why are some kinks okay and some aren't?
One of the reasons could be that people assume cannibalism is universally illegal, but it actually isn't. Focusing on the US because these are where the allegations were made, the only state my admittedly limited research found with laws against the act is in Idaho. The majority of states don't have any explicit laws. In comparison, 49 states have laws explicitly prohibiting sex with animals. The same number of states that have laws prohibiting bestiality don't have explicit laws against cannibalism.
Just in case you were wondering, you can't eat people in Idaho, but you can have sex with animals in West Virginia.
Fantasies aside, Hammer was never found to have actually eaten anyone. In an episode of Tyler Ramsey's Painful Lessons podcast, Hammer disregarded the accusations, saying;
"People called me a cannibal and everyone believed them,” Hammer said. “Now I’m able to sort of look at it with a sense of distance and perspective and be like, ‘That’s hilarious’. They were like, ‘Yep, that guy ate people.’ Like, what? What are you talking about? You know what you have to do to be a cannibal? You have to eat people! … It was bizarre.”
To me, it seems that the public's reaction to the allegations against Hammer is a clear example of kink shaming. Everyone has their own sexual interests, and many people act on them, but many people also don't act on them. Providing people don't force these fantasies on people without their consent, are they really hurting anyone?
Stay safe on the road
J
No comments:
Post a Comment