Julia Fox memoir - sexual abuse??

[IActuallyDidItMyself]

I've just read the excerpt from the actress Julia Fox's "candid memoir" in which she describes her first day working as a dominatrix (it is published in a few places, I read it in GQ)... I generally found it pretty annoying but was really shocked by this passage:

“In third grade my dad used to make me have playdates with the biggest nerds in my class. He said it was because he felt sorry for them. One of the boys was Fabien. I used to force him to strip down completely naked and make him get on his knees. And then I would ride him around like a pony and make him pick things up off the floor with his mouth.”

Does this not read like she was abusing this boy? I don't understand how this is even remotely okay... I notice that The Guardian has removed the part about making him strip down completely naked.

If true, then yes of course it is abusive. From memory, doesn’t she also have a history of CSA (as a victim) herself?

Abused children often act in an inappropriately sexual way. I would see that anecdote as further evidence of this.

Yes, but also this is taken out of the context. I mean elsewhere in the text she could be confessing to abusive behaviour and giving an example rather than just describing it as a delightful anecdote from her youth.

@Saschka I'm not sure – I don't know much about her apart from film roles and fashion...

The part I find confusing is that in the excerpt she seems to be proud of doing this (she's not questioning or reflecting on it, but says it to show that she is naturally suited to a dominatrix role..)

The passage is followed up by:

By the look on his face [the man employing her as a dominatrix], I can tell he’s thoroughly amused.
“How’s it possible? You have the face of an angel!” he exclaims.
“It’s my best weapon!” I say, giggling yet again.

I'm struggling to see how this made it into print without an editor suggesting that she reflect on her actions instead of 'giggling' about them...

@Catza hmmm possibly (and I would hope so) but it really doesn't come across in the chapter that was published... And, if she does go onto reflect on it, then I'm quite surprised that this chapter was chosen as the extract to push to press – a lot of people who read this are not going to read the book.

In the second passage she is referring to someone who employed her as a domintatrix. This is a private matter between two consenting adults and is not abuse. She is also not giggling about it now, but was then.
She is not talking about the same boy as in your first passage. Completely different situation.

@Catza yes I know... I put the bit in brackets in to make it clear who was amused. She is telling this story to the guy who is employing her to prove how suitable she is as a dominatrix and she then giggles about it. If you read the chapter she doesn't go back and reflect on the anecdote or say anything else about it. The anecdote is definitely not a private matter between two consenting adults – she clearly states that she "forces" the third grade boy to strip completely naked and then rides him like a horse making him pick things up with his mouth.

What are you actually looking for here OP? Because it sounds a bit like "come and pass judgement on this woman whose sexual morality I don't approve of".

We haven't read the book, so the bit you've taken out of context doesn't mean very much. As a pp explained, sexualised behaviour in children is a sensitive and complex area.

I'm not sure. It could be but could also be weird stuff kids do. My cousin and I used to play some weird games (no abuse).

@sprigatito I'm wondering how this got into print like this. Perhaps she does go back and reflect on this, and it is put more into context in the book. But it has been chosen as an excerpt and that seems to turn what you rightly point out is a complex and sensitive matter into something that comes across as attempting to be an amusing anecdote. I'm surprised that this has been chosen by publishers as an excerpt to promote the book as it seems very tasteless and removed from any kind of acknowledgement of what the situation was. I have zero issues with her being a dominatrix or her sexuality in general (and know who she is as I generally really like her provocative fashion etc)

Par for the course. MN is massively prudish when it comes to sexual variety, for all its "gosh. I have sex on the first date, I'm so liberated" pretensions.

Except that isn’t what the OP is about at all… it’s more shock that a sensitive issue involving a child forcing another child to strip naked and act like a horse is turned into an “amusing” anecdote… granted as PP have pointed out there may be more context if you read the whole book, but many people will just read the extract..

I have zero issue with her recounting in the same chapter that she urinates into the mouth of one of her clients - two consenting adults is a very different scenario.

Isn't third grade age 8-9 years? I agree its surprising it made the book unless they were trying to make her sound edgy.Shocking to see pp trying to make this a prudery issue.