Former Disney Star’s Defense Of Bryan Singer Is Insulting To Sexual Assault Victims Everywhere

By  | 

Bryan SingerI’m sure by now you’ve all heard the accusations against X-Men director Bryan Singer, but just in case, here goes. Singer is being accused of sexually assaulting actor Michael Egan numerous times when he was 14 and 15-years-old. The assaults allegedly took place during various debaucherous Hollywood parties in Encino, California. In a lawsuit, Egan claims that Singer got him liquored up and forced him to perform sexual acts. Now a former Disney star Matthew Smith is coming to Singer’s defense in the most baffling way: by claiming that since Singer never assaulted him, he must be innocent.


According to TMZ, Smith (a Wizards of Waverly Place alum) claims that Singer had tons of opportunities to sexually assault him, but never made a move. Because we all know that gay men are attracted to every single man on Earth, so there’s no chance that Singer could have been disinterested in Smith. Oh wait, that’s the complete opposite of the truth. Sorry Matthew, but the whole “he could have raped me, but didn’t therefore he’s innocent” defense is bullshit.

Smith apparently met Singer back in 2007 when he was 17-years-old (which is three years older than Egan was when he met the director), and they became friendly over the next two years. According to Smith, he was alone with Singer several times, and even flew with him on a private jet, yet Singer somehow managed to control himself.

Here’s the thing, Matt. Pedophiles don’t rape every child they come in contact with. The fact that he didn’t make a move on you proves nothing. Maybe you fell out of contact before he had a chance to finish grooming you. Maybe the fact that your mother was apparently there for some of the visits threw him off. Or maybe he just wasn’t attracted to you. You were years older than Egan, and being into children is kind of what pedophiles do. Perhaps you’re right, and Egan is in it for the money. Maybe “he’ll get murdered in court,” just like you say. But that’s for a court to decide, not you.

The “he didn’t rape everyone, therefore innocent” defense is faulty and hurts all victims of sexual assault. And if predators went after every potential victim, they wouldn’t be free to rape and molest for very long, now would they?



  1. Alene

    April 20, 2014 at 1:05 pm

    Well duh. Every gay man is attracted to every guy everywhere in the history of ever. Totes legit.

    • Frances "Librle" Locke

      April 20, 2014 at 4:18 pm

      Totes M’Goats

    • brebay

      April 20, 2014 at 6:13 pm

      and every male child as well…

    • brebay

      April 20, 2014 at 6:13 pm

      and every male child as well…

  2. Buffy

    April 20, 2014 at 3:33 pm

    So every murderer who isn’t killing everyone around him is surely innocent because there are people he didn’t kill……uhhhmy head hurts!

  3. Cordelia

    April 20, 2014 at 3:59 pm

    Get over yourself, Smith. And be glad you weren’t a victim.

  4. Katherine Handcock

    April 20, 2014 at 4:05 pm

    Wow. I had not heard about these allegations. Given the amount of misery that someone gets for bringing allegations forward about a public figure, I will allow that it’s possible they’re false, but I don’t feel it’s very likely. Until I learn more, I think Days of Future Past will go off my “must-see” movie list.

    I really wish people, celebrities and media personalities in particular, would learn to just say, “I don’t know the truth any more than you do; I wasn’t there. I will wait for the results of the investigation/court case.”

    • G.S.

      April 20, 2014 at 6:00 pm

      I don’t even know if Days of Future Past will even be any good. The only X-Men movie that seemed to feel like an actual X-Men movie to me was First Class.

      And I’ll never forgive what he did to Nightcrawler. NEVER!

    • Krassdaddy

      April 20, 2014 at 7:13 pm

      Exactly. Alleged and Unverified should be factors in anyone’s opinion about Singer. This article is fluff and without serving anyone except the writer’s need to be provocative and increase page hits.

    • brebay

      April 20, 2014 at 8:33 pm

      No one’s saying he did it, only that this guy’s reasoning for deciding he didn’t is illogical.

    • Katherine Handcock

      April 20, 2014 at 8:44 pm

      Definitely agree that, whether he did or didn’t do it, “he never did it to me so it must not have happened” is a spectacularly silly thing to say. Don’t celebrities have PR people to train them how to say “no comment?”

    • Frances "Librle" Locke

      April 21, 2014 at 11:10 am

      Exactly. I even say in the article that only a court can decide at this point.

    • Frances "Librle" Locke

      April 21, 2014 at 11:09 am

      My point was that just because this Disney actor wasn’t assaulted, doesn’t mean Singer is innocent. I specifically say that only a court can decide that. It’s right there in the article.

      And to be honest, I chose this partially because I am a sexual assault victim myself and the logic of “he didn’t rape one person so he must be innocent” is something I find deeply insulting as a survivor myself. But I specifically chose to be fair and say that only a court can decide this man’s innocence or guilt. Not me, and not this Disney actor.

    • K.

      April 20, 2014 at 8:56 pm

      ITA. (Although poor Cate Blanchett got raked across the coals when she said as much re: Woody Allen).

  5. SunnyD847

    April 20, 2014 at 4:39 pm

    I’m a little uncomfortable with saying “maybe he wasn’t attracted to you.” It implies that rape is about sexual desire rather than power and domination and that people are assaulted because they are “hot” or “sexy” which leads to victim blaming.

    • brebay

      April 20, 2014 at 6:13 pm

      I don’t think it implies a purely physical “attractiveness” in that sense. Just that whatever he looked for in his victims, this guy didn’t have: that could be age, physical characteristics, confidence, personality, family presence, etc. And while, yes, rape is about power, many rapists do target victims they find physically attractive. The leap to that somehow implying any responsibility on the victim for “being sexy” does not logically follow. Ted Bundy raped and murdered exclusively brunettes, for example, and many pedophiles prefer one race, hair color, size, age, etc. That is still something that is within the perpetrator, not the victim.

    • Frances "Librle" Locke

      April 20, 2014 at 6:14 pm

      Exactly. I meant that in regards to the fact that Egan was significantly younger when he met Singer.

    • AugustW

      April 20, 2014 at 7:19 pm

      There is even a different word for being attracted to a 14 year old vs being attracted to a 17 year old. I can’t think of them though.head is full of chocolate.

    • brebay

      April 20, 2014 at 8:32 pm

      ephebophilia – sexual attraction to teens, versus pedophilia.

    • Frances "Librle" Locke

      April 21, 2014 at 11:06 am

      I actually didn’t know this. Thank you!

    • Frances "Librle" Locke

      April 20, 2014 at 6:13 pm

      Pedophilia is also about attraction to children. That was meant in regards to the fact that he was older than Egan when he met Singer.

    • K.

      April 20, 2014 at 8:54 pm

      I agree with you–I didn’t like that line either.

      I think that as with all types of sexual assault, it is about power and violence, not attraction. A lot of men are also attracted to women, but that doesn’t mean that rape has to do with their sexual attraction. I don’t know if this is *technically* how pedophilia is defined, but I think when we’re talking about abuse, it’s a sexual perversion that’s attracted to the power differential and the helplessness of children–not just prepubescence. I’m pretty sure that there’s a difference between envisioning children as willing participants and enjoying victimizing children (even though yes, both would be forms of victimization).

      I think that it’s far more reasonable to conclude that sexual predators prey on those that they perceive are going to be ideal victims. I don’t know the background about Smith and Egan, but my guess is that Egan was more likely targeted not necessarily because of his younger age being more attractive, but more for reasons that would accompany his younger age–ie, he would be less likely to protest, easier to control and manipulate, and unlikely to tell anyone about Singer’s advances.

    • Katherine Handcock

      April 20, 2014 at 9:11 pm

      Well, there are preferential pedophiles – only attracted to/have sexual activity with children or young teens – and there are those take advantage of a person they can easily manipulate, control, or dominate, sometimes out of sexual desire but also out of convenience and curiosity – they’re sometimes called situational molesters. So either scenario is possible. And, to be honest, either scenario involves the perpetrator seeking out someone who is easier to control/manipulate than others of the same age; even a preferential pedophile will pass up opportunities with a kid who seems too confident or knowledgeable to be convinced to hide the crime.

      Preferential pedophiles do usually have a “type”, just like adult men and women find particular people attractive, and age is a factor. But it’s also about appearance – if someone is attracted to 10-year-olds, a 14-year-old who’s immature (physically and emotionally) will be more appealing than a 10-year-old who’s an early bloomer.

      And I just realized that my interest in forensic psychology means I know WAY too much about this.

    • Frances "Librle" Locke

      April 21, 2014 at 11:07 am

      My point was that Egan was significantly younger than the Disney actor when he met Singer. Pedophiles are attracted to children, not adults or older teens. It wasn’t meant to imply typical sexual attraction in any way. Sorry if that wasn’t clear.

  6. brebay

    April 20, 2014 at 6:14 pm

    Sweet, I’m going to go rob the bank a mile away, and my defense will be ” Well, if I’d wanted to rob a bank, there were three closer to my house, so I’m innocent.” What a douche.

  7. arielmarie

    April 20, 2014 at 6:21 pm

    It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia anyone? They have a characteristically horrible (…and funny) over-the-line episode about basically this.

    • JJ

      April 20, 2014 at 10:47 pm

      I can see this Matthew Smith guy coming out Mac style with a photo of him from the Disney set going, “I was cute guy, huh, how come he didn’t pick me. Why that guy I was right there look at this attractive guy”. Will he go over to Singer’s house wearing a pair of gym shorts next like Mac as well.

  8. Krassdaddy

    April 20, 2014 at 7:08 pm

    What about adding anywhere in the article or response that “its only an accusation of Singer, not fact that he did anything” to remember that that Smith’s defense of him and statement about not molesting him are just self serving PR and the content is idiotic and would be ignored by victims of assault who know better. Article should focus on facts of the accusation and the events that follow, or even a researched objective and fact based report about how victims of assault actual feel about articles that tell them how they should feel about a stupid celebrity’s opinion of an accused molester.

    • brebay

      April 20, 2014 at 8:31 pm

      Why? This is a short piece about someone making an ignorant comment about their flawed reasoning. We all know it’s an accusation, that doesn’t mean we can’t talk about it. How about you stop being editor to the world and let people exercise their free speech. “A researched, objective, fact-based report?” A blog is, by definition, an opinion site, this is not an academic journal or a research project, it’s social commentary. Take a pill.

    • K.

      April 20, 2014 at 8:59 pm

      It’s also a very common response to allegations of sexual abuse–some version of “but I KNOW that person and there’s no way he’d ever do that!” This includes girlfriends of rapists and siblings within the same family if a parent has only been abusing one of them.

    • Frances "Librle" Locke

      April 21, 2014 at 11:04 am

      I specifically say that only a court can decide at this point.

  9. jsterling93

    April 21, 2014 at 11:12 am

    I’m bothered that because someone is claiming, years after the fact, that Singer did these things that people automatically assume he is guilty.

    • Frances "Librle" Locke

      April 21, 2014 at 11:16 am

      I’m definitely not just assuming that Singer is guilty. Nor am I going to assume he’s innocent. That is for a court to decide. I specifically say this in the article for that very reason.

      “Maybe “he’ll get murdered in court,” just like you say. But that’s for a court to decide, not you.” (He being the accuser)

  10. Butt Trophy Recipient

    April 21, 2014 at 11:27 am

    Well clearly Singer only likes raping non-gay boys

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *