The news that Grindhouse director Robert Rodriguez has split with his actress girlfriend Rose McGowan, effectively costing her a role in both his upcoming Barbarella and Red Sonja remakes and the series “Women in Chains” got us wondering about the implications of, well. We guess we could call it “benefitting from a relationship.” Or “being a muse.”

Or, possibly, “riding your boss in order to gain power and/or money:”

Sure, maybe in Rose’s case, she just happened to fall deeply in love with her married director who had 53 children to raise (after all, let’s not take any of the blame away from Robert - he’s a cad, that’s pretty much a given) who had, coincidentally, overseen the only (potentially) star-making vehicle in which she’d ever appeared. Maybe it was just sort of a funny little coincidence that the only future acting projects tied to Rose’s name happened to be helmed by Robert. And, remember, this was a person who willingly dated Marilyn Manson at a time where he could lay a fart and it’d make headlines.

Is this empowerment? An instance of a woman doing whatever it takes in order to further her career ambitions, asserting her power over a weaker-willed man? We tend to think not. Why? Because it didn’t give Rose McGowan the upper hand in this situation. There was no chance that she’d be able to turn her relationship with Robert Rodriguez into a means of gaining control over her own career decisions: she would always be at his mercy; he’d always be the one with more power in this particular coupling. As evidenced, we guess, that she’s lost out on what promised to be her biggest roles other than “The One Who Replaced Shannen Doherty On ‘Charmed’” and “The One Who Got Stuck In A Garage Door in Scream.”

“Women in Chains” indeed.

What do you think, though? Would you have done the same in Rose’s position(s) if it meant possibly becoming rich and/or famous?