Rain Dove, Queen of Straw
It is fair to say that Rain Dove is in a very invidious position at the time of this writing due to her own actions. Rain Dove is seeking to present a defense against certain allegations I am making against her that are in part as follows:
I allege that Rain Dove, did willfully and maliciously betray and violate the privacy and safety of a disclosing sexual assault survivor for the purposes of financial gain and to expand her platform under false pretense.
Rain Dove is seeking to deny the fact that Jimmy Bennett sexually assaulted Asia Argento on the basis that because Asia in her texts to Rain Dove said "it wasn't rape" that meant Asia consented to Jimmy Bennett.
Dove has worked out her entire defense regarding the range of allegations I am making against her turns on whether Asia Argento consented to the act in question. If Asia did consent then Rain believes her actions are justified.
It is true that if in fact Asia did consent then the worst of my allegations against Rain Dove would fall. However if it is as I am alleging and documenting here, that Asia Argento did in fact not consent to the act in question, then all my allegations stand and Dove stands fully exposed as a predatory sociopath.
It is Dove's position that because Asia stated in her texts to Dove that "it wasn't rape" that no sexual assault by Bennett on Asia occurred.
This is the first glaring flaw in Dove's logic. It is fact that all rape is sexual assault but not all sexual assault is rape. Asia's statement that it was not rape but that it was sexual assault presents no material contradiction that Dove can reasonably claim.
In response to Dove's position I say that Rain Dove's musings are not a credible defense but are in fact compelling evidence that she was never fit to "make the determinations" on the basis she is claiming she made them under even if those claims were true.
Rain Dove claimed she never sold the texts to TMZ media.
False as confessed to by Rain Dove after maintaining that lie for well over a year.
Rain Dove claimed she had to do what she did because the law required it.
False. No such law exists that applied to Rain Dove's circumstances. It later emerged that Dove did in fact go to the Police who told her they were not interested.
Rain Dove now claims she just had to sell the texts to TMZ media because it was the only way to get the word out as the Police as stated were not interested.
False. I am confident TMZ would have taken the texts for free. Rain Dove claims she gave a lot of the money she received to charity yet has produced no receipts to prove this.
Rain Dove claims she was doing what Asia Argento and Rose McGowan were demanding in their own activism and that Asia had to be kept honest.
Specious: Asia was in fact being honest and it is Rain Dove who is now proven to be a pathological liar who is clearly exhibiting the breath taking hypocrisy and audacity that only a sociopath could muster.
If Rain Dove had been an activist with basic skills and honest intentions she would be aware of the extensively documented research into the range of counter intuitive matters that come into play when considering a question of sexual assault.
For the last two years we have witnessed a relentless stream of rape culture fueling myths being leveled over and over again against anyone who has spoken out about the sexual assault issue and disclosed.
Rain Dove has created and perpetuated a straw construct straight from the book of rape culture in a malicious attempt to try and destroy a person she has exploited and violated to conceal her offenses.
The second major flaw in Rain Dove's "reasoning" is this.
The question is not whether Bennett "raped" Asia Argento.
The question is did Asia CONSENT to the sexual event in question?
Simply put, it is evident, even having regard for the distorted context in which the TMZ texts present, that Asia is not saying that a sexual assault did not take place, she is in fact describing how she experienced that assault. In short Asia was disclosing what happened to her.
Rain Dove is essentially trying to take a single text out of the entire context of the exchange that took place and claim she can credibly and reasonably take the inference that Asia was saying no assault took place. That is categorically untrue.
Asia Argento's Disclosure
“I have never had any sexual relationship with Bennett. The public knows nothing; only what NYT wrote. Which is one sided. The shakedown letter. The horny kid jumped me. I had sex with him it felt weird. I didn’t know he was a minor until the shakedown letter. He wrote me this afterward (referring to note from Bennett) and kept sending me unsolicited nudes all these years up until 2 weeks before the attorney’s letter. It wasn’t raped (sic) but I was frozen. He was on top of me. After he told me I had been his sexual fantasy since he was 12.”
That is Asia Argento's disclosure that was gained by deception and manipulated before Rain Dove sold the texts in question to TMZ media. So what Dove is trying to do is take the words "It wasn’t raped (sic)" out of the context provided by Asia's full statement. In the reading of that statement the following considerations apply:
Having regard for Asia's state of mind when she was having those communications with Dove it is clear that Asia believed she was talking to a person who understood her position and was supporting her.
Asia was obviously completely unaware that her communications were to be subjected to Rain Dove's entirely self serving and wholly flawed fantasist attacks and that those communications would be manipulated and distorted in their context to be used as a weapon against her.
Despite Dove's straw man manipulations it is clear upon inspection and having regard for the full context of the communications that Asia's consistent message is that she did not consent to Jimmy Bennett.
English is a second language for Asia Argento.
For the record it needs to be noted that Rain Dove did not provide a lot of other texts which support Asia's position to the media and despite this it is still clear that Asia's stated position to Rain Dove was that she did NOT CONSENT to the event that occurred in that hotel room.
There is no reasonable argument available to Rain Dove that she could credibly argue that she could take the inference that Asia did in fact consent. What Asia did in fact say was that she was never in a sexual relationship with Bennett, Bennett sexually assaulted her and she was not treating it as "rape" in the sense he used force to over power her.
Asia clearly states that she froze which as we all know is a very common response and later it came out the whole thing was over before she could get her mind clear enough to figure out how to respond to what was happening to her.
It is also evident, as part of processing the trauma of being sexually assaulted, that Asia has decided to take the view that in Bennett's mind he was not raping her. However that in no way allows the inference that Asia actually in any way consented to what was happening.
Having said that, Bennett did have penetrative intercourse with a non consenting party and at the raw basic level that fits the definition of rape. Asia Argento evidently takes the view Bennett was giving it a go and her inability to react to the situation gave Bennett the false impression of consent.
Asia Argento has every right to take that view in relation to the assault that was inflicted on her but exercising that right in no way alters the raw truth and that truth is that Asia Argento did not consent to Jimmy Bennett and as a result is completely innocent of the spurious allegations made against her.
What is wholly evident is that this particular case punches holes in a lot of assumptions that would normally apply and for all intents and purposes is quite unprecedented. It requires a range of considerations that Rain Dove is simply not fit to be determining.
Yet Rain Dove presented herself firstly to Asia, then to the media and then to the wider movement on social media as an expert in matters of sexual abuse and criminal cases and disclosures.
Yet that is far from the truth and of course Rain Dove has an extensive history of presenting false claims of qualifications and expertise as detailed in this highly informative NBC article.
Essentially Rain Dove presented as an expert who could help Asia, lured Asia into disclosure and then took that disclosure and manipulated it to try and make Asia look like a sex offender.
Dove succeeded in conning the movement into considering a false test and almost succeeded in robbing Asia of her truthful defense. In response to all this Rain Dove is seeking, as I have stated, to take three words out of the context of a detailed statement and make the spurious argument that she is claiming is justification for her actions.
I beg to differ. What actually occurred in fact was that Rain Dove sold out a disclosing survivor that Dove had lured with false claims of expertise and knowledge for financial gain and narcissistic supply.
Rain Dove inflicted vicious fantasist lies on Asia Argento and as a result has inflicted great harm upon her. To try and extract herself from the consequences of her actions, Rain Dove is reaching for rape culture tactics and spewing an endless stream of lies in a wretched and cowardly attempt to avoid accountability.
The question is not whether Jimmy Bennett literally raped Asia Argento. Nor does it turn on whether a sexual event took place. Nor is it relevant how Asia chooses to view that matter. The only question that matters at this point in the determination is whether Asia Argento consented or not and Asia did not consent to sexual activity of any kind with Jimmy Bennett.
To say otherwise, Rain Dove as the accuser, must show that she had credible evidence and or the circumstances were such that she can claim "reasonable belief". No such evidence exists. There are only the straw constructs Dove put together to facilitate her violation of Asia Argento.