Interesting story. Yesterday, I stumbled upon a recent Upworthy article, which shared actor Wil Wheaton's response to a question about whether we can separate artists from their art. As long-time readers should know, I've consistently spoken in favor of separating artists from their art. If a work of art positively affects a person, why should said person feel shame if the artist is a criminal or just simply an a$$hole? Given this, I was pleasantly surprised to hear Wheaton's take.
He said:
"I have been precisely where you are, right now. In fact, we were just talking about this a few days ago, as it relates to a guy who wrote a ton of music that was PROFOUND to me when I was a teenager. He wrote about being lonely and feeling unloved, and all the things I was feeling as a teenager.
He grew up to be a reprehensible bigot, and for years I couldn't listen to one of the most important bands in my life anymore.
But this week, someone pointed out that he was one member of a group that all worked together to make that thing that was so important to me. And the person he was when he wrote those lyrics is not the person he is today. And the person I was when I heard those lyrics doesn't deserve to be shoved into a box and put away, because that guy is a sh*t.
This is a long way of saying that Joss turned out to be garbage. Because of who my friends are, I know stuff that isn't in the public, and it's pretty horrible. He's just not a good person, and apparently never was a good person.
BUT! Buffy is more than him. It's all the actors and crew who made it. It's all the writers who aren't Joss. Joss is part of it, sure, and some of the episodes he wrote are terrific.
At least one of the episodes he wrote was deeply meaningful to you at a moment in your life when you'd experienced a loss I can only imagine. The person you are now, and the 16 year-old you were who just lost the dad, are more important than the piece of sh*t Joss Whedon revealed himself to be.
His bad behavior is on him. He has to live with it, and the consequences of it.
16-year-old you, who just lost their dad, shouldn't have to think about what a sh*t Joss Whedon is for even a second. That kid, and you, deserve to have that place to revisit when you need to go there.
I can't speak for the other actors, even the ones I know. But I will tell you, as an abuse survivor myself who never wanted to be in front of the camera when he was a kid: it's really okay for you to enjoy the work. The work is good and meaningful, and if nobody is going to watch it because of what one piece of sh*t did two decades ago, what was it all or?
I'm not the pope of chilitown, so take this for what it's worth: I believe that when some piece of art is deeply meaningful to a person, for whatever reason, that art doesn't belong to the person who created it, if it ever did. It belongs to the person who found something meaningful in the art.
If it feels to you to put it away and never look at it again, that's totally valid. But if it brings you comfort, or joy, or healing, or just warm familiarity to bring it out and spend some time with it, that's totally valid, too.
I've written a lot of words. I hope some of them make sense and are helpful to you."
More thoughtful than the typical "F*ck the artist!" or "F*ck cancel-culture!," I thought, so I shared it on Twitter. Upon receiving a comment directed toward me and the actor, I clicked on the actor's handle, and once I did so, I read the words, "You're blocked." At this I had to kind of chuckle, for I had just posted a positively-slanted article about an actor, and shortly thereafter discovered I was blocked by him.
Why? My guess is because I once laughed at a Dave Chappelle joke - which brings me to part deux of Wheaton quotes. Unlike the first quote, however, I will be thoroughly dissecting this one.
In a recent Facebook post, Wheaton decided to comment on Netflix's ardent support of Chappelle.
Here's what he said:
"For anyone who genuinely doesn't understand why I feel as strongly as I do about people like Chapelle making transphobic comments that are passed off as jokes, I want to share a story that I hope will help you understand, and contextualize my reaction to his behavior."
Okay, I'll bite. Please go on...
"When I was sixteen, I played ice hockey almost every night at a local rink. I was a goalie, and they always needed goalies, so I could show up, put on my gear, and just wait for some team to call me onto the ice. It was a lot of fun."
I don't know where he's going with this, but I admit to being curious...
"One night, I'd played a couple hours of pickup with some really great dudes. They were friendly, they were funny, they enjoyed the game, they treated me like I was part of their team. They welcomed me."
Alright, I'm now starting to garner a sense of where this may be going. Please continue.
"After we were finished, we were all in the locker room getting changed into our regular clothes.
Before I tell you what happened next, I want to talk specifically about comedy and how much I loved it when I was growing up. I listened to record and watched comedy specials whenever I could. One of the definitive comedy specials for me and my friends as Eddie Murphy's Delirious, from 1983. It had bits that still kill me. The ice cream song, aunt Bunny falling down the stairs, mom throwing the shoe. Really funny stuff."
...and we segue from pick-up ice hockey games to Eddie Murphy. Now I'm back to my WTF-face.
"There is also extensive homophobic material that is just f*cking appalling and inexcusable. Long stretches of this comedy film are devoted to mocking gay people, using the slur that starts with F over and over and over. Young Wil, who watched this with his suburban white upper middle class friends, in his privileged bubble, thought it was the funniest, edgiest, dirtiest thing he'd ever heard. It KILLED him. And all of it was dehumanizing to gay men. All of it was cruel. All of it was bigoted. All of it was punching down. And I didn't know any better. I accepted the framing, I developed a view of gay men as predatory, somehow less than straight men, absolutely worthy of mockery and contempt. Always good for a joke, though."
Wait, so Old Wil is blaming Eddie Murphy for Young Wil's homophobia? That's interesting. I watched Delirious when I was around Young Wil's age and I never viewed gay men as somehow less than straight men (whatever that means). So, maybe, just maybe, instead of pointing fingers at a stand-up comedian's performance, Young Wil should take a step back, and perhaps look in a mirror for blame. Just a thought. Anyway, you may continue...
"Let me put this another way: A comedian who I thought was one of the funniest people on the planet totally normalized making a mockery of gay people, and because I was a privileged white kid, raised by privileged white parents, there was nobody around me to challenge that perception. For much of my teen years, I was embarrassingly homophobic, and it all started with that comedy special."
I'm sorry, but I smell bullsh*t. I find it ironic Wheaton labels Murphy's homophobic jokes as "inexcusable," when it appears as though he's using Murphy's performance as an excuse for his homophobia. Here's something crazy: I was a privileged white kid, raised by privileged white parents (they may disagree with the "privileged" part), and I was taught and learned to treat people - all people - the way I wanted to be treated. There weren't exceptions based on race, creed, sex, orientation, etc. So that's what I did, regardless of the movies I watched, jokes I heard, music I listened to. No matter who a person was, what they looked like, or what they believed, I tried being nice to them, and if I slipped up, I didn't blame watching an R-rated movie for my misbehavior. Wheaton's post started in an attention-grabbing fashion, but now is appearing to get progressively weaker as the story continues. Regardless, let's hear him out.
"Let's go back to that locker room.
So I'm talking with these guys, and we're all just laughing and having a good time. We're doing that sports thing where you talk about the great plays, and feel like you're part of something special.
And then, without even realizing what I was doing, that awful word came out of my mouth. 'Blah blah blah F****t,' I said.
The room fell silent and that's when I realized every single guy in this room was gay. They were from a team called The Blades (amazing) and I had just ... really f*cked up."
Whoa, whoa, whoa! Back up! You guys were talking about great plays made during your hockey game and you just let the word "f****t" come flying out? Newsflash: This isn't an episode of Seinfeld. You can't just say, "So, I was playing a hockey game and, yada, yada, yada, I said 'f****t.'" Yeah, we're going to need a few more dots to connect parts one and two." Well, anyway, while I'm beginning to question the thoroughness of this story, I'll allow Mr. Wheaton to finish.
"'Do you have any gay friends?' One of them asked me, gently.
'Yes,' I said, defensively. Then, I lied, 'they say that all the time.' I was so embarrassed and horrified. I realized I had basically said the N word, in context, and I didn't know what to do. I wanted to disappear. I wanted to apologize, I wanted to beg forgiveness. But I was a stupid sixteen year-old with pride and ignorance and fear all over myself, so I lied to try and get out of it.
'They must not love themselves very much,' he said, with quiet disappointment.
Nobody said another word to me. I felt terrible. I shoved my gear into my bag and left as quickly as I could."
Again, Wheaton here attempts to dissolve himself of responsibility, saying, "But I was a stupid sixteen year-old with pride and ignorance and fear all over myself..." Also, why did he feel the need to describe the hockey player's inquisition as "gentle"? Was that really necessary? Anywho...
"That happened over 30 years ago, and I think about it all the time. I'm mortified and embarrassed and so regretful that I said such a hurtful thing. I said it out of ignorance, but I still said it, and I said it because I believed these men, who were so cool and kind and just like all the other men I played with (I was always the youngest player on the ice) were somehow less than ... I guess everyone. Because that had been normalized for me by culture and comedy.
A *huge* part of that normalization was through entertainment that dehumanized gay men in the service of 'jokes'. And as someone who thought jokes were great, I accepted it. I mean, nobody was making fun of *ME* that way, and I was the Main Character, so...
I doubt very much that any of those men would be reading this today, but if so: I am so sorry. I deeply, profoundly, totally regret this. I've spent literally my entire life since this happened making amends and doing my best to be the strongest ally I can be. I want to do everything I can to prevent another kid from believing the same bigotry I believed, because I was ignorant and privileged."
Okay, so here's how this big ol' confession is coming across to me. For whatever reason, Mr. Wheaton is feeling extreme guilt and remorse for his derogatory rhetoric from over three decades ago, and he's trying to come to terms with it. Sadly, in order to do this, he's gone the scapegoat-route. Honestly, I don't get this. Ask anyone in the LGBT community if they feel Wil Wheaton is homophobic and I have a crazy hunch no one is going to respond in the affirmative. Why? Because, from what I can tell, he's been a staunch ally of said community for years. He made a mistake when he was 16 and it appears he's learned from it. That's the thing about mistakes. We all make them. It's not about who we were at the time of the mistake; it's about how we learned from it and grown as a result. It's not about who we were; it's about who we became. Okay, now it's time to close us out...
"So this stuff that Chapelle did? That all these Cishet white men are so keen to defend? I believe them when they say that it's not a big deal. Because it's not a big deal TO CISHET WHITE DUDES. But for a transgender person, those 'jokes' normalize hateful, ignorant, bigoted behavior towards them. Those 'jokes' contribute to a world where transgender people are constantly under threat of violence, because transgender people have been safely, acceptably, dehumanized. And it's all okay, because they were dehumanized by a Black man. And the disingenuous argument that it's actually racist to hold Chapelle accountable for this? Get the f*ck out of here.
I love dark humor. I love smart, clever jokes that make us think, that challenge authority, that make powerful people uncomfortable. I don't need a lecture from some dude in wraparoud sunglasses and a 'get 'er done' tank top about how I don't understand comedy and I need to stick to acting. I don't need a First Amendment lecture from someone who doesn't understand the concept of consequences for exercising speech the government can't legally prohibit.
Literally every defense of Chapelle's 'jokes' centers white, cishet men and our experience at the expense of people who have to fight with every breath simply to exist in this world. Literally every queer person I know (and I know a LOT) is hurt by Chapelle's actions. When literally every queer person I know says 'this is hurtful to me', I'm going to listen to them and support them, and not tell them why they are wrong, as so many cishet white men do. If you're inclined to disregard queer voices, especially as they relate to this specific topic, I encourage you to reflect on your choices and think about who you listen to and why.
Too many of my fellow cishet white men are reducing this to some abstract intellectual exercise, which once again centers our experience at the expense of people who are genuinely threatened by the normalization of their 'less than' or 'outsider' status. Thirty years ago, I centered myself and was appallingly hurtful as a result.
I was sixteen and didn't know any better. I still regret it. Frankly, a whole lot of y'all who I've already blocked should feel the same shame about what you said TODAY that I feel for something I did three decades ago when I was sixteen and didn't know any better. But you don't, and that is why people like me need to keep using our voices to speak up and speak out."
Okay, first thing's first: Wil Wheaton literally doesn't know how to correctly use the term "literally." Secondly, it seems I was probably right regarding the reason behind him blocking me. Now, is it just me, or in this final portion of the post, does it not seem as though Mr. Wheaton is, mm, overcompensating for something? Like a closet-racist who brags about having black friends? If one is truly not racist, why the need to brag about having black friends? Wouldn't their consistent behavior towards POC be the prime indicator on whether or not they were indeed racist? Wil Wheaton has long been an outspoken supporter of the LGBT community, so why the need to add the bit about knowing a "LOT" of queer individuals? I may be reading too deeply into things, but that kind of rubbed me the wrong way. To be perfectly honest, LGBT members I've spoken with regarding Chappelle's Netflix special haven't reacted much differently than that of the general population. I'd say most who have seen the special didn't get overly offended by it, and some did - similar to the general population. Oddly enough, of those who haven't seen the special, a seemingly large majority of both the LGBT community and general population have been greatly offended by it.
Here's the big problem I have with Wil Wheaton's take: It focuses on the branch of a single tree, while ignoring the forest. Let's pretend for a moment that Dave Chappelle's comedy is outrageously homophobic and transphobic and then find a way to magically erase all such comedy from the world. What would the end result be? How would our LGBT brothers and sisters be affected, positively or negatively? When going to a comedy club, they'd be less inclined to hear jokes directed toward their demographic. This could potentially decrease the spread of such jokes among the general population. Some may feel relieved by this, while others may feel ignored. Oddly enough, while some members of the LGBT community may be offended by jokes directed toward their community, others see it as as sign of being included. Now it'd be one thing for a comedian to tell negatively-slanted jokes about the LGBT community for an hour. It's quite another for him or her to tell jokes about each and every demographic, and if they exclude one for fear of offending its members, some members of said group may feel excluded, but I digress. If we were to ban jokes pertaining to the LGBT community, would that impact their employment opportunities? No. Would it impact their potential child-adoption status? No. Would it impact whether or not a bakery would want to serve them? No. Would it impact their rights under the law? No. The more time we obsess over subjectively offensive jokes revolving around the LGBT community, the less time we have to fight for their equality under the law. Not Dave Chappelle nor any other comedian can pass or block laws from being passed in Congress. If we truly want to help our LGBT brothers and sisters be viewed and treated as equal members of society, we must take the fight to our legislators, not someone who tells jokes for a living.
Oh, and if you, after watching Chappelle's special, still feel... Wait, how did it go? Wil, could you please lend me a hand here?
"I'm not the pope of chilitown, so take this for what it's worth: I believe that when some piece of art is deeply meaningful to a person, for whatever reason, that art doesn't belong to the person who created it, if it ever did. It belongs to the person who found something meaningful in the art.
If it feels to you to put it away and never look at it again, that's totally valid. But if it brings you comfort, or joy, or healing, or just warm familiarity to bring it out and spend some time with it, that's totally valid, too."
Ah, yes, that was it. Thanks.
https://www.upworthy.com/wil-wheaton-shares-how-to-separate-art-from-problematic-artist
https://bleedingcool.com/tv/star-trek-host-wil-wheaton-calls-out-dave-chappelle-netflix-more/
Comments
Post a Comment