By David Futrelle
Twenty women have accused opera singer Placido Domingo of sexual harassment and, in at least one case, of outright sexual assault. In Quillette, reactionary propagandist Heather MacDonald argues that, regardless of the truth or falsity of their accusations, these women are simply too unimportant to be allowed to derail the career of “an artist of Domingo’s stature.”
MacDonald, a Manhattan Institute fellow whose politics lie in the general vicinity of the so-called “Intellectual Dark Web,” devotes a good deal of her essay to glorifying the talents of the “Three Tenors” alum — praising his “warm, soaring voice” and his “remarkable pitch control” and declaring him “one of classical music’s greatest ambassadors and impresarios.”
Never mind that, according to an Associated Press investigation, Domingo’s reputation as a predator was such an open secret in the profession that staffers went through elaborate machinations to try to ensure he he was never alone with a woman. MacDonald treats Domingo’s mostly anonymous accusers with a deep disdain, dismissing these “females” as “small-time soloists” and “disgruntled bit players.”
MacDonald seems to have no trouble imagining that at least some of the accusations are true; she just can’t bring herself to care. The alleged incidents took place long ago, she repeatedly notes, and besides, it’s not like the now-elderly singer is going to keep harassing and groping women in his vicinity.
At one point, astoundingly, she posits that he might well have felt a professional obligation to act out the part of a sex-obsessed lothario.
“As the object of so much sexual attention” from fans, she writes,
Domingo could have been forgiven for thinking that his own advances were part of the mix. He clearly belongs to the “Latin Lover” prototype, a good-natured, charming seducer from the old Hollywood era. Learning to deal with such types used to be part of a woman’s skill set.
But MacDonald’s most outrageous argument, one that makes clear her profound elitism and lack of empathy for whole classes of human beings she clearly considers disposable, is that Domingo is too important to accuse.
It is a grotesque inversion of the proper hierarchy between public accomplishment and private sexual behavior to sacrifice an artist of Domingo’s stature for the sake of 20 disgruntled bit players, laboriously harvested from thousands of professional interactions characterized by graciousness and consideration.
How dare these unimportant women sully the reputation of such a star — especially because he only (allegedly) harassed a small percentage of those he interacted with. Which is a bit like saying we should ignore a serial killer’s crimes because most days he wasn’t killing anyone at all.
Put simply, the discomfort of these belated accusers decades ago is not worth Domingo’s head.
Harassing and groping is evidently a-OK if you have perfect pitch control.
Civilization rests on the realm of public achievement in ideas, politics, and art. The private realm of Eros should be subordinate to the public realm; how someone behaves in or getting to the bedroom is irrelevant to his achievements in the public square, absent criminality.
Do I need to point out that sexual assault is a criminal offense?
If we discovered that James Madison, say, was a skirt-chaser, that fact should have no bearing on his achievements as a political theorist and statesman.
The flaws of even the most eminent of thinkers are highly relevant to our assessment of their legacies. Historians have long wrestled with the fact that many of America’s “founding fathers” were both champions of freedom (for white people) while at the same time owning and, in the case of Thomas Jefferson, raping slaves.
Yes, as MacDonald argues, “Domingo brought beauty into the world.” He also seems to have brought great ugliness into the lives of many women around him. No amount of talent can absolve a sexual predator.
Send tips to dfutrelle at gmail dot com.
We Hunted the Mammoth relies entirely on readers like you for its survival. If you appreciate our work, please send a few bucks our way! Thanks!
I’m almost certain he is. Old predators often continue offending until death.
Also, being a part of a successful music group does not make it ok to be a predator.
The really chilling thing about this “hot take” is that these same attitudes are in play–usually to a lesser and less blatant extent–in every case of male-on-female sexual harassment/assault. Because in the vast majority of societies, women are deemed unimportant compared to men. It doesn’t matter who she is, what the details of the story are, or how many other victims come forward with similar complaints. There always erupts an undercurrent of “How dare that peon try to sully his reputation? He is A Man and has important work to be getting on with!”
I’ve heard similar arguments before, and what comes to mind is this concept is basically a milder version of Jasmine from the show Angel. Give the many more enjoyment in their lives, but at the non-consensual sacrifice of the few.
Which, regardless of the merits of that type of argument (and as far as I’ve seen, most people would argue that it isn’t a fair tradeoff) this is clearly a BS application of it when it comes to humans lacking supernatural powers – most top-rated entertainers are top-rated precisely because they have high empathy and would be extremely unlikely to abuse their celebrity status that way. The ones which do are rarer. For every Bill Cosby, there are a dozen or so Tom Hankses. For every Louis CK, there are a dozen or so George Carlins. We can afford to lose a few.
One must also ask how many of the victims might have become top-rated entertainers if they hadn’t had their confidence savaged by this kind of abuse.
Ugh. Reading that AP article really gave me the creeps.
BTW – speaking of the “intellectual dark web”, Richard Dawkins has entirely unsurprisingly placed himself in that camp, in a recent interview with the Times of London.
She’s not a fan of Black Lives Matter either. That tells you everything you need to know about her doesn’t it.
One can appreciate the talent of an artist, but still hold him accountable for missbehaviors. Yes, Placido Domingo is a great artist and he is also a well known predator. If no one tells him no, that he cannot, under no circomstances behave like that toward others, he will keep being a predator. You do not make a service to the man by not criticising him. He can be a great artist who no longer prey or abuse others. Being criticised doesn’t make him “lesser”. This view of morality reeks of a vulgar utilitarianism where one right can buy an unrelated wrong in the great balance of things. It’s a vision of the world where morality is completely relative to ones power and prestige instead of a common set of principles.
Like… there are other people who can sing. There are almost 8 billion people on the planet, there’s got to be at least one guy out there who can sing as well as Placido Domingo. Move the predator out of the way and let some fresh talent shine.
Why, you’d almost think it was standard operating procedure for predators to punch down.
@LindsayIrene
Even within the much smaller field of opera singers, there are better singers than Plácido Domingo. He could sing well, but he was undeniably not the best and was mostly famous because of his work with Pavarotti and Carreras one of The Three Tenors and his pop crossover work.
Also, isn’t Quillette the news site that’s trying to bring back phrenology? We shouldn’t trust anything else they publish, either.
It’s always baffling to me when people act like there’s such a short supply of talent and skill that we have to put up with the talented and skilled people who are predatory.
The arts/entertainment fields are chock full of talented people who never get a big break. We are never going to run out of people who can sing or act or write. We just aren’t.
The intellectual dark web sounds like a place you buy child porn and hire hit men
Why are these idiots so eager to jump into that mess?
Domingo has been coasting on his reputation for a decade or more. Musically, I mean. I was in one production with him—he only sang the high notes on opening night when the recording was being made.
I’m posting because a groupie of my acquaintance finally ‘scored’ with him during the run. As a Beeg Ohpera eStar, Domingo was the focus of a lot of sexual attention that wasn’t based on any virtues on his part.
I never heard of him being exploitive or predatory. But I can’t imagine he had any place to learn normal manners or conduct in the hothouse atmosphere around inflated stardom.
That “getting to” is sure doing a lot of work there, isn’t it? I guess people’s workplaces where Domingo harassed and assaulted them are not part of “the public square,” since they are on the way to Domingo’s bedroom and are therefore somehow an extension of it.
Yeah, totally not his fault if he’s predatory. As we all know, every single person who becomes a star immediately gets transformed into a predator and they certainly no longer exist in the same world as everyone else with the same culture and same mores. They can’t possibly know any better.
David,
According to the Rationalwiki page gijoel cited, Mac Donald has a space between the two parts of her last name.
“As the object of so much sexual attention”
So what we are saying here is that Mr Domingo had plenty of options to bang women who were interested in having consensual sexual encounters with him? Why didn’t he just do that? Then we might be vicariously enjoying accounts of his scandalous affairs, rather than having to be depressed about his habit of hurting women.
I really wish people would stop equating predatory behaviour with sex. These two things are not the same.
Fuck, and I used to like Domingo the best of the Three Tenors. His “Pagliaccio” made me cry when I was 15, knew not a word of Italian, and saw him on the Carol Burnett show.
(Yes, I am An Old.)
@Bina
Yes, I’m also currently trying to separate the talent from the man. I’m a long time opera fan. I think we just have to accept that you can love someone’s work while hating their behaviour.
I have the same problem with Roman Polanski, who’s made some films which speak to me very deeply while also being an acknowledged predator. I don’t want to lose Repulsion, Chinatown and Rosemary’s Baby, but I also don’t want to minimise the shit Polanski has done.
TL:DR – I don’t know how we resolve this.
No one is even calling for Domingo’s head. At most, they’re calling for his job, and maybe for criminal charges.
@Karalora
This. I was denied a career in music at the age of 15 that was given to my brother on the fear that I would get sexually abused by known sexual predators in the music faculty at a top school. I mean I probably wouldn’t be top-rated because of other systemic biases, because I have an introverted personality, because maybe my talent wasn’t as great as myself and other people (including some top-rated talent) estimated, and above all because I absolutely 100% would have been sexually abused exactly as feared [since at the time I had in no way begun to face or recover from my then-ongoing other sexual abuse]. But I never got the chance, it was flat denied to me, with the stated reason for the denial being to protect me from predators at my tender age.
Heather MacDonald is not fit for Democracy.
She has an inherent need for an aristocracy that operates under a different legal and ethical standard to lord above her and grind it’s bootheel into her face for her to feel that the natural order is preserved and the world is as it should be.
If there is not inherited aristocracy to put her in her place she’ll invent one out of opera singers, real estate developers and assorted riff-raff.
Re the dilemma between artist and behavior:
A good friend once gave me some excellent advice: “trust the art–not the artist.”
I find it works more often than not (ymmv).
As for the OP, well, her compassion is sorely lacking, to put it mildly (shudder).
@Fenton
I think that’s kind of the point of the so-called “Intellectual Dark Web.” All they care about is preserving a harmful stays quo (while making a few things more oppressive) and purposely being antidemocratic.
@ObSidJag:
Unfortunately, my money goes to the artist, not the art. That’s the bit I have trouble with, when the artist is a terrible person.