I initially wrote this in response to a comment but it only tangentially applies so. Hollywood is weird, but in spite of them acting like they set the tone for people caring about stuff, they're often actually reacting so they weirdly hold up a mirror of society. Especially looking back it becomse just so fucking bizarre.
Take Jodie Foster, she actually highlights the weirdness of Hollywood in so many ways. Started very young (was a Coppertone Girl when she was 3, which uh, yeah remember the dogs pulling the little girls swimsuit bottoms off, in an ad for sunscreen?) with a breakout role playing an underage prostitute in a movie about an unhinged guy that highlights so many issues in society (mental illness, men putting women on pedestals and then becoming rage monsters when they get rebuffed, political radicalization, sex trafficking, plenty more). This leads to a somewhat real life version of that with John Hinckley. She matures and plays a role dealing with rape, highlighting victim blaming (which, things like that lets Hollywood pretend that they really care about that type of shit "we made a movie about it!" kinda like Crash "we take racism seriously!" and Brokeback Mountain "we take gays seriously!"). Then she becomes a megastar playing a female FBI agent tracking a serial killer (Silence of the Lambs highlights so many cultural things, it and Taxi Driver you could write entire books about the way those two films so deftly expose things about society, often without explicitly doing so, and it must be remarked not always in healthy or maybe "correct" ways either). Makes Contact with Carl Sagan, although I'm not sure she's ever said too much strongly about religion (according to wiki this is about the extent: "Foster is an
atheist but has said it is important to teach children about different religions, stating that "in my home, we ritualize all of them. We do Christmas. We do
Shabbat on Fridays. We love
Kwanzaa. I take pains to give my family a real religious basis, a knowledge, because it's being well educated. You need to know why all those wars were fought."). Then she struggles with mainstream success as she struggles with accepting her own sexuality. She stands by her friend Mel Gibson, who is shown to be a pretty terrible person (abuse of his family, racist, DUIs; as far as I know though no sexual assault allegations although he showed he was a typical sexist plenty; hell just look at What Women Want...ugh so cringe-inducing now). [Which honestly, actually shows that maybe her standing by him and supporting him was a good thing (not saying that is what should be done about all this sexual assault stuff, or of heinous things), as Gibson has started working with a Holocaust survivor organization. And hopefully he's worked and is still working to make amends for many of the other things he did.] Then Foster takes a role in a Roman Polanski film (yeah...have fun explaining that all you big name actors that took roles in his movies trying to act like he paid his due or that he was unfairly treated - hopefully you can do that to the what 10 so far underage girls he's accused of raping?). Then she finally comes out as gay over 20 years after people taking issue with how Buffalo Bill wasn't a positive portrayal of gay people (which is true, and let's be honest, Hollywood of the time didn't give a shit, they certainly weren't trying to hold a mirror up to the fact that some of the serial killers were likely mentally unstable do to being gay/transgender but struggling to accept that in a society that openly antagonized them and at best made them punchlines of jokes; they were doing it to make the character even more weird) claimed she was a closeted lesbian.
The Travis Bickle-John Hinckley thing is kinda weird. There's even a connection with the stupid Pizzagate situation, where, ironically, radicalized right wing - white men with guns especially - feel like the need to white knight (rich considering how many of them run around screaming accusations of such at others). Which, we see, there's some validity to something needing to be done, but they're being manipulated, and their way of handling the issue is often very poor.
I think there are other lessons to learn though, and we need to be especially cognizant about taking this stuff seriously, which means not rushing things and letting due diligence play out (hopefully we will work so that that leads to more prosecutions over this stuff, as rape and sexual assault is a glaringly mishandled situation in our justice system, which is one of the reasons it goes unreported so often, let alone leads to actual charges or even more rarely actual conviction - and yes, but notably even rarer still some false convictions). I think it is very important to keep certain groups from hijacking the narrative, namely evangelicals and right wing groups. Because they have so often been the ones perpetrating it (as seen with the insanity of the Satanic Panic situation - wherein we found that we should've been investigating the religious institutions as they were often the ones actually perpetrating the abuses). I noted in another thread about the Exorcist and it showing our society, where the mentality necessary to find that movie afraid, is the same one that enabled the Satanic Panic idiocy. And likewise, the right wing mentality that propped up Pizzagate, is the same one defending Roy Moore but trying to castigate all of Hollywood (and academia, as we'll start to see that will experience a similar situation with regards to the rampant sexual assault accusations), as dens of this behavior. Which they say the same thing about politics, and there's some truth to it, its just that they refuse to accept how often the people they support are the ones perpetrating it and not this shadowy cabal Illuminati/NWO/whatever.
Congrats on being part of the problem.
THE WHOLE FUCKING POINT HERE, WHICH YOU SEEM TO HAVE MISSED COMPLETELY, IS THAT MANY MANY PEOPLE IN THE ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY ARE GETTING AWAY WITH RAPE AND SEXUAL ASSAULT SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE DUMB LAZY COWARDS EXACTLY LIKE YOU HAVE APATHY FOR PEOPLE GETTING RAPED AND SEXUALLY ASSAULTED WHILE YOU ARE ONLY FOCUSING ON YOUR PERSONAL JOY.
Can you hear me now, you pathetic cowardly lazy stupid ignorant useless piece of shit?
What the fuck?
Yes, because you're a saint when it comes to this type of stupid behavior. I recall a thread where you were mad about an actress apologizing for being insensitive over a costume because "people are too PC" which is exactly the type of nonsense that has let this shit happen. Because people like you keep trying to dismiss actual problems because people bring up fringe aspects that highlight exactly the problems they're talking about, it lets this shit continue and lets the worse parts become more blatant because they feel support when people act like no, the problem is the people taking issue with it, not the people perpetrating it. Its why Louis C.K. felt that not only could he deny the allegations, he could fucking make jokes about them too, and people would lap it up.
His point was why are you idolizing people you don't know at all in the first place. The only reason average people are so stunned is that they keep putting celebrities on pedestals. And then acting all surprised when they find out they're like everybody else, if not worse, because that celebrity and fandom makes people blind and enables them to potentially do awful things.
No, that's not the whole fucking point. He's not apathetic to the victims, he's apathetic to the people acting like "oh no, we're losing all our celebrities because they're terrible people!" type of shit.
Are you the former Verizon guy? Haha, WTF? I don't know, maybe if you'd pull your head out of your ass you wouldn't need to shout, and maybe you'd be able to actually listen or think for a second?
Now, my vitriol being exercised, I believe (I really want to at least) you're actually earnest in your concern about sexual assault, and that you simply misunderstood what he was saying. But that type of reaction is not helping anything either.
I was actually responding to the column you posted where the author was crushed about Tambor.
Why be crushed? Why not just let the criminal process handle itself, but there is no reason to be crushed about a "hero".
edit: My comment shut up and enjoy the show is probably what set off your capslock tirade.
To better explain what I meant. Let's say you see a movie you like, there is no need to before you admit that you liked it, investigate the backgrounds of each actor, see what charities they contribute to, see if there are any allegations about them in the past. You can just like the movie. And when they stop coming out in movies because they commit sex crimes, you don't have to be crushed. You can treat them as any other of the convictions for sex crimes that happened that day. You don't even have to stop liking the movie you really liked.
I agree with your sentiment (I think?) but I'm kinda baffled as that article is pretty much saying exactly that. That they realize that their fandom makes it hard to adequately process allegations when its against someone they really liked, and in this instance its was about more than the acting too. Which I think you're missing that, its not just about their acting, its that they didn't just play a role, they used their platform to talk about injustice. Its kinda pointing out some of the hypocrisy of Hollywood, how they can be open about some injustices, but couldn't about others, including ones that were more prevalent in Hollywood. It doesn't really say that outright but I think it highlights that. It does outright say how there's the hypocrisy of fandom, where its easy to believe people who commit certain things are monsters, because it seems you'd have to be, but we're finding out, that's not the case.
I'm not really following your "why idolize people, why not just let the justice system sort it out?" since that's kinda the point, average people don't know that these people are doing this awful stuff, because we're getting this carefully crafted persona of them from their movies and loaded interviews (or on the flipside, attempts just to tear them down). The whole thing is unhealthy.
Yeah that probably is what set it off and I'm not sure why you put it. I get your point, but sorry, I don't agree. Knowing that awful things were done as part of making the film (either by casting, and we're hearing a lot of this stuff happened on set or due to actors working together so a guy will invite a female one over and then sexually assault her), definitely detracts from my enjoyment of it. I think it was Rich Evans (from RedLetterMedia) who said "if you can't separate the art from the artist, you're going to have a hard time enjoying anything very soon", which I think is pertinent and what you're essentially saying. I think Jack (him and Rich do PreRec, their gaming focused part), made the point that context matters, which is kinda what I'm trying to say. For context, lets look at the Louis C.K. situation, namely the movie he made. The movie is in some ways exactly about this, about overlooking the artist's faults to enjoy the art (how a lot of people have justified working with Woody Allen and Roman Polanski), and it supposedly pokes fun at it. Which, that is a salient point, however, it being made by someone that had allegations about them, makes it harder to accept/enjoy, let alone him putting a scene that supposedly directly plays out the allegations against him.
Which that's especially egregious example. The issue is, we're finding out that a lot of other films/shows had alleged assaults and/or rapes happen. Like the Gilmore Girls (shit, it was actually One Tree Hill!). Which, that becomes really awkward, as the show isn't explicitly about that (not sure if they had episodes about it, I have the impression its more a light-hearted thing about love and life, but I'm not real familiar with the show), but hearing that it occurred on set or due to connection that existed due to the show, just kinda...gives you some discomfort. Depending on the situation, I can overlook it. But it can make things difficult. Another is the Last Tango in Paris, finding out, especially the butter scene, was more of a snuff film, really makes it difficult to enjoy the "art".
Back on point, that's the rub. Being a fan of someone/something is quite natural. I see the point about, why? And I agree to an extent. I just don't think its that crazy and I think everyone is guilty of fandom of some sort. But there's definitely unhealthy levels of that and that's when the issues arise. The most human thing these days, is coming to grips with the fault of the things you hold dear. Be it a celebrity, a movie, a game, book, your sports teams, or the company you work for, your religion, or the place where you live (after all, what is nationalism). Its fine to idolize it some, and want it to be its best, but we need to also need to hold rational scrutiny to it. Not act like its above reproach or try to blindly defend it against any and all flaws, real or perceived.
There was a phrase, that I don't agree with, although there's some truth to it. It was something along the lines of "never meet your heroes" because they inevitably fall short of your expectations. You put them on a pedestal, and finding out they don't live up to that, is tough to deal with. And invariably, nothing will live up to everyone's ideal of what it is or should be. However, I think you should just be realistic. But its tough to do that. And then you take into account how it can become an integral part of who people are, like people build their entire lives around it (football coaches, working at a school, then maybe you end up with something like Penn State and the Sandusky situation; or people and their religions, or their country, or loved ones).
All of that's really just a wordy way of saying, its fine to have admiration, but don't let it blind you. That's easier said than done. That's not to excuse it, just trying to explain it.
Seems very harsh. His point doesn't fundamentally conflict with concern for sexual abuse. Arguably, people getting emotionally invested in celebs they don't know is one of the things that helps perpetrators get away with it. People don't want to even consider accusations about someone they are invested in.
This. I won't wholly condemn it, as I think just about everyone is guilty of idolizing someone(s) or something(s) to an unhealthy degree. But I think that is definitely true, and that there's a lot of people that take it to very unhealthy levels.
And its not even just the emotional investment. Hollywood likely didn't want to expose Weinstein and others because they felt it would harm their ideological brand. Same way conservatives have with so many of theirs. There's some truth to Hollywood being the televangelical-esque preachy side of the modern liberal ideology. And they know that, which is why they didn't want a big bombshell like that coming out. Which, I'm not sure if we should say thankfully or alarmingly, we've had a balance of that behavior from many of the conservative idealogues, so in spite of their attempts, they haven't won their propaganda war over their attempt to paint liberals as that type of monster.
