Azealia Banks has cultivated a reputation for picking fights with the press, politicians and her fellow artists. The controversial rapper has both gathered fans and fame and turned many off with her brash contrarianism and tendency to take Twitter trolling too far.
![Why is it that Azealia Banks's version of events is not trusted?](/web/20170112212513im_/http://www.watoday.com.au/content/dam/images/g/s/4/m/t/n/image.related.articleLeadwide.620x349.gs5xo9.png/1483258918434.jpg)
But now it seems she's finally questioning whether cultivating a self-described "crazy girl" public image was worth it.
After an altercation with none other than Russell Crowe on Saturday night, Banks filed a police report alleging he assaulted her as he threw her out of a small gathering in his hotel suite. According to witnesses, Banks arrived at the event as a plus one, laughed at the music choices, called Crowe and one of his guests "boring white men" and was told by an unnamed female guest to "pipe down".
![Actor Russell Crowe seems to have inspired a great deal more moral support than Azealia Banks in the aftermath of the ...](/web/20170112212513im_/http://www.watoday.com.au/content/dam/images/g/s/4/e/u/7/image.related.articleLeadNarrow.300x0.gs5xo9.png/1477010888079.jpg)
Banks allegedly responded by dropping n-bombs and threatening to stab people with a broken wine glass. Banks' own (very different) account suggests the wine glass comments were in jest, but all present agree that Crowe then grabbed her in a bear hug, removed her from the room, and called security. Banks claims Crowe also tried to choke her, quietly called her the n-word and spat at her. Crowe denies this. On Sunday, when Crowe refused to apologise, Banks filed a charge of battery against him with the Beverly Hills Police Department.
Now, I don't presume to know what actually happened in that suite. It's a "he said she said" situation and we only have snippets of what really occurred. What I do know – having spent last night in the grimy quagmire of comments sections – is that, generally speaking, Crowe appears to have been gifted the benefit of the doubt, while Banks' version of events is being denounced as the crazy ramblings of an habitual attention seeker.
Frankly, it's an excellent example of public opinion being shaped by the perception filter of white patriarchy – because, really, how else can the adamantly assumed innocence of a man with a long history of violent outbursts over mild slights be explained? Violent physical and verbal altercations are hardly outside Crowe's repertoire, but this is conveniently forgotten in the face new accusations from a young black woman with a mouthy reputation.
Witnesses (Crowe's friends) back his version of events, but as Banks describes Crowe dropping the n-bomb subtly, and any alleged spitting and choking may have occurred out of view as he manhandled her out of the room, there's certainly room to believe either party here.
But whilst Crowe's history of physical violence appears to have no bearing on how his actions are perceived, Banks' history of inappropriate tweeting is apparently proof positive that she is not to be trusted. I won't defend Banks' use of homophobic and racist slurs, or her habit of wishing graphically described violence upon public figures who offend her; but when one person's behaviour is considered a permanent mark against their character, and another can operate free of prejudice regardless of their past, surely we must note the double standard.
Coincidentally, news of their fight broke on the same day that the Evening Standard published an interview with Banks, who declared that "maybe it's time to stop being a crazy girl."
In the article, the rapper reflects on the backlash against her tweet war with Zayn Malik, which turned many of her fans against her. "It finally reconciled these two conflicting thoughts I had about being real and being professional," she says.
"I realised you're not keeping it real by being a crazy girl. You don't lose anything by keeping your mouth shut. So maybe it's time to stop being a crazy girl."
This moment of self-reflection illustrates a certain bind in which young women, especially young women of colour, can find themselves. In attempting to be true to herself and refusing to play the game of politeness and compliance, Banks has made a habit of shoving hard at expectations wherever they exist. Operating from a position of "f--k you and your opinion" can be liberating, but Banks now finds herself facing the consequences (perhaps unfair) of rebellion often taken too far.
To that point, it's worth noting the cultural context of Banks' more outrageous comments, as the anger she expresses so vehemently is almost always rooted in the perceived appropriation of her work or cultural identity (particularly in her public grievances with Iggy Azalea and Zayn Malik).
The problem of cultural appropriation has been explained eloquently by Hunger Games star Amandla Stenberg here (recommended watching if you haven't seen it already). Banks' frustrations over the appropriation of her music and style are legitimate, however offensively expressed, and to dismiss them as "crazy" or "attention seeking" is to embark upon a slippery slope.
Throw in the stereotype of "the angry black woman", ripped apart here by Cynthia L. Dorsey, and Banks is in a triple bind. Stay quiet about your oppression, become stuck in "respectability politics" or have your legitimate anger dismissed as an inherent "crazy" trait. As Dorsey says "we are living in a world where my attitude discredits me no matter what I do, I might as well lay my anger out on the table for you to see."
While Banks struggles with these questions of identity and expression on a world stage, she is being judged and held to account by gendered and racialised expectations of perfection. Unlike Crowe, Banks isn't given much room to make mistakes.
With all this in mind, it's easy to see how being told to "pipe down" might have been the last straw for Azealia Banks on Saturday night. As someone with an expressed awareness of the tedious, ongoing silencing that comes with oppression, Banks may, in that moment, simply have reached her limit.
But her response has been described by various witnesses and news outlets as a "rant", "erratic" and "an insane speech", with little attempt made to glean her perspective. She was consistently rendered unrelatable, and inherently untrustworthy, within the media narrative.
Nevertheless, Banks' conclusion that "you don't lose anything by keeping your mouth shut" may be a tad misguided. It's not a simple dichotomy of silent or "crazy" after all, and I, for one, hope this woman who deliberately defies the status quo finds a way to speak her truth.
I really don't know what happened in that hotel room. I don't know whose account is correct. But the assumptions we make about whose perspective is reliable in the absence of proof reveal our biases, and it's worth taking a minute to step back and self-reflect.
5 comments
Comment are now closed