Harvey's Gangrenous Ball Sac
It couldn't have happened to a nicer guy
I think the first story needs no introduction other than OMG how have we not been talking about this for years? As for the Christmas movie story, suffice it to say that I’m a fan of Lifetime movies all year round (so much so that they were referenced in our wedding vows) and not a fan of Candace Cameron Bure. Read on.
Weinstein’s Testicles Take Center Stage in Rape Trial
Before jurors went to deliberate in Harvey Weinstein’s current rape trial, they were taken into a private room and shown pictures of the dethroned power broker’s penis and testicles. Harvey’s genitals—which one witness described as looking like a fish—have played a prominent role in both of his rape trials based on the theory that if you’ve seen them, you remember them, and if you remember them, you’ve seen them (very likely without your consent).
Weinstein has been accused of sexually assaulting numerous women (the count is over 80). While each situation varied the underlying theme was always “do what I want, or you’ll never work in this town again.” As the founder of Miramax and funder of hundreds of movies such as Shakespeare in Love, the English Patient, and Good Will Hunting, Harvey meant what he said and had the influence to follow through. Of course, according to some of his accusers, even doing what he wanted had consequences. Well-known actresses Mira Sorvino, Anabella Sciorra, and Rose McGowan all say he raped or harassed them and then blacklisted them after their encounters.
Much of this became public in 2017 when the New York Times and New Yorker reported that dozens of women had accused Weinstein of rape, sexual assault, or sexual abuse over a 30-year span. The allegations launched a reckoning in Hollywood and beyond that came to be known as the Me Too Movement. (The #metoo hashtag was first used a decade earlier by activist Tarana Burke to inspire empathy and empowerment in women of color who had been sexually abused.)
The investigation by the press led to investigations by law enforcement and has resulted in two rape trials thus far. In 2020, Weinstein was convicted of a criminal sex act and third-degree rape and sentenced to 23 years in prison. The current trial, which a California jury is deliberating as I write, involves a new set of charges and four victims still referred to as Jane Doe #1 through 4 despite some of them having been identified. One accuser is Jennifer Sibel Newsome a filmmaker and wife of California Governor Gavin Newsome. (Charges related to a fifth Jane Doe were dropped mid-trial.) If convicted of these charges, Weinstein faces an additional 60 years in jail.
In both trials, witness testimony about Harvey’s genitals was considered key. According to the prosecutor in this case, Weinstein suffered from Fournier’s Gangrene in 1999. Fournier’s Gangrene—a form of necrotizing fasciitis—specifically affects the soft tissue of the scrotum, penis, or perineum (the area between the scrotum and the anus sometimes called the taint). It usually occurs in men (though women can get it) and is more common in those who are over 60, morbidly obese, and/or have diabetes. (Weinstein was only 53 in 1999, but the other two conditions apply.)
The condition occurs when a cut or scratch on the genitals becomes infected with certain dangerous bacteria. The infection moves quickly and can spread to the thighs, stomach, and chest. If not treated, it destroys the muscles, nerves, and arteries in the area. Fournier’s Gangrene is fatal in somewhere between 3% and 50% of cases. Those who survive will need skin grafts and other reconstructive surgery. Men who survive often experience chronic pain, painful erections, and sexual dysfunction.
Harvey didn’t die, but he did need extensive surgery that included removing his testicles from the scrotum and placing them in his thigh for safe keeping. Thigh pouches are often used as a temporary measure while the patient is healing and undergoing reconstructive surgery, but they can be permanent and appear to be in this case. Testimony also suggests that Weinstein needed direct penile injections of Caverject to get erect.
To recap: Harvey Weinstein got flesh eating bacteria of the nuts. To save his life, doctors removed his testicles from his scrotum, and he now lives with an empty ball sac, chronic pain, massive disfigurement, and erectile dysfunction. (Is the phrase “it couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy” echoing in anyone else’s head?)
Witnesses in both trials were asked about his genitals. Jennifer Sibel Newsome, who accused him of raping her in 2005, called his penis “kind of fish-like” and said, “something was distorted in the testicles.” She added that there was “Lots of skin, lots of skin down there.” Jane Doe #2, who says Weinstein groped her and masturbated on top of her, said this on the stand: “His penis was disgusting. It looked like it had been chopped off and sewn back on….”
Weinstein’s genitals became a particular point of contention in the cross examination of Jane Doe #1, a European actor and model. On the stand, she said that Weinstein forced her to “suck his balls” and that she was choking and crying. Hoping to have his Legally Blonde “you don’t wash your hair the day you got a perm” moment, defense attorney Alan Jackson actually asked the woman how Harvey’s balls could be in her mouth if he doesn’t have them. (Imagine this as the dialogue in a legal drama or an episode of SVU. It would be absurd.)
Jackson maintains his client was never even in a hotel with this woman and accused her of changing her story once she learned about Weinstein’s testicular deformity. He argued: “The reason that you changed your story is because you realized at some point that Mr. Weinstein does not have testicles in his scrotum.” Jane Doe #1 insisted her story had not changed and that she’d told detectives early on that “it was like empty skin.”
This would almost be comical if it weren’t so infuriating. At first glance, gangrene of the genitals feels like the ultimate karmic dicktribution for a lifetime of terrorizing women, but Weinstein got the deadly infection in 1999 and was not stopped for another 18 years. Instead of proving that karma is a bitch, this news serves as further evidence that Weinstein’s power and privilege bought him decades of him access to women and their guaranteed silence. There are dozens of women who could have come forward with allegations that included matching descriptions of a very unusual set of balls—details that I think would have warranted investigation—but they were all too intimidated to come forward.
Over the years, Weinstein has become more and more like a movie villain (large, withered, and gruff) but if he or anyone else had put this detail on film—the rapist with deformed genitals that look like Emperor Palpatine—we’d all say it was a little too on the nose.
Candace Cameron Bure Disses Same-Sex Christmas Romance
Apparently, our Congress—even some of its conservative members—has more progressive ideas about love, romance, and marriage than former-child star Candace Cameron Bure. Last week the Senate voted 61-36 to pass the Respect for Marriage Act. The legislation, a version of which passed the House over the summer, prohibits states from denying the validity of an out-of-state marriage based on sex, race, or ethnicity.
The Supreme Court said much the same thing in 2015’s Obergefell v. Hodges (and in Loving v. Virginia long before that), but advocates and lawmakers started to worry about marriage rights again after this summer’s ruling against abortion. If this newly conservative court could take away one hard-fought right, it could clearly take away others. In fact, in his concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas suggested the court should reconsider Obergefell and Loving as well as Griswold v. Connecticut (which secured the right to contraception) and Lawrence v Texas (which declared laws against sodomy unconstitutional).
In this environment in which the individual rights we have relied on and formed families around are under attack by an activist court, it makes sense for Congress to take action. It also makes sense politically as a clear majority of Americans—71% according to a June Gallup poll—support same-sex marriage. (In 1996 when Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act, which essentially did the opposite of the current bill by defining marriage as between one man and one woman, only 27% of the public was in favor of legal same-sex marriage.)
Still, it took an amendment guaranteeing that non-profit religious organizations “… will not be required to provide any services, facilities, or goods for the solemnization or celebration of a marriage” for a number of Republicans to agree to sign on. In the end, 12 Republican Senators and 47 GOP member of the House stood up for our right to marry whomever we wish. (Bipartisan progress, maybe, but it doesn’t seem like nearly enough to me.)
Candace Cameron Bure, however, will not do the same. The outspokenly religious actress got her start as oldest daughter DJ Tanner on Full House and went on to become a television personality, serving as the conservative voice on The View for two seasons and competing in Dancing with the Stars. She was also one of the inveterate queens of the Hallmark Christmas movie—that perfectly formulaic drama that brings us sadness (someone has just lost a parent or been mercilessly dumped), dreams (someone wants to be a pastry chef, open a flower shop, or win a contest), winter weather (someone gets snowed in), a cute child (someone has a school-aged daughter, niece, or neighbor), and of course chaste romance all set to the best royalty free Christmas music money can buy.
The genre—which I associate first with Lifetime Television, then Hallmark, and more recently Netflix—has been criticized not just for its repetitive plots and terrible dialogue but for its utter lack of diversity. Until very recently, these movies all presented a fairy tale vision that was very white, wealthy (half of the movies are about marrying a literal prince), and completely heterosexual. Change has been gradual—a gay best friend here, a black co-star there—but in recent years Lifetime and Netflix have expanded and focused stories on people of color and same-sex couples. The Hallmark Channel was so slow to get there that its chief, Bill Abbott, was fired and new leadership brought in.
As a result, Bure defected and went to join Abbot at something they’re calling Great American Family (GAF) where she is the chief creative officer. Bure explained that Hallmark changed too much under new leadership and that GAF would be different: “I knew that the people behind Great American Family were Christians that love the Lord and wanted to promote faith programming and good family entertainment." Then in a November interview with the Wall Street Journal she said that the GAF would “keep traditional marriage at its core” in its Christmas fare. Many read this as a direct slap against same-sex marriage and possibly Hallmark’s first same-sex holiday movie which is set to air in December.
I’ve watched a lot of Christmas romance movies in the two weeks since Thanksgiving (my 12-year-old viewing partner refused to start the X-Mas season until the turkey was done). We’ve seen the Freddy-Prinze-Jr-small-town-music-teacher-writes-a-song-with-and-falls-for-the-J-Lo-esque-celebrity one, the Lindsay-Lohan-loses-her-memory-of-being-a-hotel-heiress-and-falls-for-the-guy-who-runs-the-local-motel one, the chef/Uber-driver-who-wants-to-own-a-food-truck-agrees-to-be-the-fake-girlfriend-of-and-falls-for-the-rich-lawyer one, and three (yes three) about the pediatrician who falls for a prince with a broken leg and ultimately becomes Queen of San Savarre (a fictional nation that might just border Genovia).
There’s been a little diversity: two of the movies were about Latina families; the actress who plays both the pediatrician/queen and the waitress who dreams of opening her own restaurant in yet another movie is of mixed race, and her character has a Black family in one movie and a white family in the other; and we were sure the little sister in one of the movies was a lesbian (though our prediction turned out to be wrong).
In order to be fun, these movies have to have cringy dialogue, cheap scenery, green screen outdoor shots, and be utterly predictable. They do not have to be white or focus on heterosexual couples. Unfortunately, the two holiday movies I’ve seen featuring gay couples—Single All the Way on Netflix and Happiest Season on Hulu—were just too good to be part of the Hallmark bad Christmas movie genre. They both had well-written scripts, believable plots, real emotional depths, and great casts. I enjoyed them thoroughly, but in a very different way.
Those of us looking for true equality can only hope that Hallmark’s upcoming gay Christmas movie, The Holiday Sitter, is bad enough to be good (and possibly that GAF fails altogether before next Christmas.)