The Collateral Damage of "Cancelling"
Vložit
- čas přidán 10. 09. 2024
- Hoodie design by: www.hihosilverworks.com
So, as so often happens, comments in a previous video has sent my mind down a path that I felt the need to do a follow up. This time, on the topic of "cancelling" someone like Joss Whedon, some commenters were concerned that meant an undeserved punishment of all the other people involved by tossing aside their work and possibly taking away residual checks. So let's try to parse all this as best we can.
✔ SUPPORT ✔
Patreon: / councilofgeeks
Tip jar: PayPal.me/coun...
✔ OTHER CHANNELS ✔
Break Room of Geeks / @breakroomofgeeks
Vera Wylde: / verawylde
✔ SHOP ✔
Merch: www.teepublic....
Book that I Wrote: a.co/d/atfibBA
✔ SOCIAL MEDIA ✔
Twitter: / councilofgeeks
Facebook: / councilofgeeks
TikTok: www.tiktok.com...
Instagram: www.instagram....
✔ OTHER PROJECTS ✔
Podcast with my Partner: fireandwaterpod...
✔ WISHLISTS ✔
www.amazon.com...
www.etsy.com/p...
✔ CONTACT ✔
E-mail: councilofgeeks@gmail.com
Mail:
Council of Geeks
PO Box 4429
St. Johnsbury, VT 05819
One thing to take into account is that people who refuse or quit jobs in Hollywood for whatever reason have a harder time finding jobs in the future. So if an inexperienced stagehand gets an offer to work on a show/movie by someone like Whedon, don't blame them. They have bills to pay too.
Exactly. Even an actor as talented as James Marsters hasn't really had much high profile work since Angel because Whedon spread the word that he was "difficult", when actually he'd done his best to make James's life hell on set. The abuser blaming the victim. :(
@@neuralmute That's not true, Joss never said James was difficult.
Oh no. I feel so bad for Hollywood, now. Thanks for opening my eyes.
@@neuralmute Maybe that is because he is creepy and not a very good actor?
@@neuralmute Now that I think about it, James never, ever said that Joss made his life hell either. On the contrary, he has stated that Joss was a gentleman.
Canceling has always been around. It's usually been unnoticed because it's been employed by the powerful who never questioned it; for example, people fighting for their civil rights in the 50's and 60's got canceled by those supporting the status quo, sometimes to the extent of being beaten and murdered. Now that it's being turned back on the powerful, it's being called "cancel culture" and mocked. It IS a complicated issue in collaborative projects, but I wouldn't ever question anyone voting with their wallet or their attention. It sometimes involves a repeated decision to give up something you enjoy, or to inconvenience yourself, to support a moral issue that it would be easier to gloss over, and no one else would even notice it, really. In my own life, I am pissed that I have to give up my favorite grocery chain - clean, great selection, best deli around - because of its Repugnant political contributions, including a large donation toward the Jan 6 insurrection. Yeah, I know there are employee stockholders, and this affects them. But we each have to balance these things out for our own conscience and land where we land. Those stockholders are as at risk as any of us if our democratic republic is toppled in favor of a fascist state, so I'll just shop down the road at Brand B and hope this chain stops supporting fascism.
Haven’t watched yet, but Someone is certainly having fun with makeup and hair lately.
Vera's looks have been the light of my lockdown days...Also: I had zero interest in tiktok until *somebody* mentioned Vera's runaway success there. So now I have a tiktok account...
@@gozerthegozarian9500 same, I seriously wish she'd pimp out the tik tok channel more
@@Samantha_76 She seems to be rather "WTF?!"-ed by her unstoppable rise over there...Me, I see it more as evidence for the *youtube* -algorithm failing her over *here*...So: Moar commentz! Feed the algorithm!
Riiiiight? The red lashes with the red lip? 🏆 And can I just say how hard it is to find the right red for each person's skin tone but she nailed it????
I love the red lip!
Some people be like: "The government shouldn't regulate businesses. Instead consumers can 'vote' with their money and not give a company/person their business. If you object to how company treats its workers or if they discriminate against certain people/groups then don't give your time/money/attention/business and look to another company. In other words you can 'boycott' the bad company/person by giving you business to some one else (or no one)."
I say: "Ok. fair point. That's what I'll do! I won't give them my money/support. I'll 'vote' with my money/support and give it elsewhere!"
But then often SOME of those SAME people will also be like: "Wait, no! You shouldn't withdraw support! What about all the other people in the organization who did good work? Is it fair that they get dragged down too? We still must support this company/person because we must help/support all those innocent people connected to the 'bad' thing."
Like this shit is contradictory folks. Should I be a good informed consumer and express my anger by withholding money/support from a group I find objectionable or fucking shouldn't I? If we can't regulate business to not discriminate against certain customers or abuse their workers, if the government shouldn't do that, then 'cancelling'/boycotting is all we as consumers have left.
I think maybe you should vote with your money. Don’t worry, workers will still get paid.
You should prbably just do what you want, and not worry so much about how other people may view it,
Like most things in life, the answer is not cut and dry or one size fits all. You have to think deeply about your own values and decide what to do based on that.
@@mschrisfrank2420 From his post it seems like he is more worried about doing what other people think is right. I
I would prefer if the bad person just gets cancelled but I work in television so I'm super biased . I'd be pretty upset if a show I worked super hard on for years loses viewers because one of the actors took 30 seconds to say something dumb on twitter.
However I suspect the former solution is probably more effective in making a change in the long run.
Sarah Michelle Gellar said it best, she doesn’t mind having her name be associated with Buffy, but she doesn’t want her name be associated with Whedon.
@@BobbyD262 But she still said she doesn't want to be associated with Whedon, doesn't that count for something? It's still better than when Lindsay Lohan defended Weinstein :S
@@BobbyD262 Saying she doesn’t want her name associated with Whedon is confirmation enough.
@@BobbyD262 I mean, if you really need to reach for something to justify your position. How's "Joss isn't allowed in a room alone with Michelle anymore." for knocking that wall down?
@@BobbyD262 gonna be a hard sell saying you didn't make it obvious, dude. Nobody is as oblivious as you'd need them to be for an "I didn't actually say what I think about the situation! You can't be mad at me or think I'm a tosspot!" to fly.
@@BobbyD262 yeah, sure, you'd have to be some kind of psychic to know that so many of the people who try to play things off as "playing devil's advocate" are really just floating their crappy opinions to see if they can get away with them, yeah, no, you wouldn't be able to detect any of that incredibly easily with just 3 whole decades life experience dealing with every kind of bad faith d-bag. Not at all. Lol.
I worked under someone like Joss once, and it was a nightmare. I stayed because I liked the job and the other people, but dreaded being alone with him, because he was dehumanizing and hurtful. It was even worse for my best friend, who would be in tears on the drive home every day. I feel deeply for the people he treated this way on the job.
I also fully agree that working with him and hiring him from the scandal onward is 100% complicity. The execs need to know that people are watching their moves and taking notes.
It's the past works that are tricky. Using Buffy as an example, there are tons of people who grew up with and were formed by the show. It's grown into who they are, and it's taken deep root in the (gasp, I'm old) 20 years since it aired. It's become entrenched in the lexicons of how we analyze television. For them, for us, dropping it would be akin to amputation.
Here's the thing though. It can still be watched and enjoyed. That big asterisk is there for a reason. All these new people, watching and falling in love for the first time, in their teens and 20s, just like we were, are smart enough to process the asterisk. Some might drop it because of that, and that's fine. The ones that don't aren't complicit in anything by exploring a 20 year old show for the first time, they just have the capacity to process that the show is good and the creator is, basically, a big meanie head. They can keep both of those balls in the air. I guess what I'm saying here is: be kind to the people who still interact with it.
I was one of the good faith questioners in the last Joss video who was actually curious about the topic, and I'm very thankful that it was addressed. I'm only mostly in agreement with the responses in this one. Not full agreement, and I rarely am on this channel, since I'm just not at that level of passion about...well...anything. For anyone who disagrees with me on this, keep it up. You're allowed to. I'll just reiterate what I said before: be kind about it.
I've been having a lot of trouble processing this mess, tbh. Buffy came up just when I needed it, as a young queer autistic woman, escaping an abusive home, needing both escapism and validation. That series got me through a lot, and even forced me to deal with my long repressed trauma over my own mother's near fatal illness (requiring risky brain surgery) when I was a young child. About 10 yrs ago, I lived a dream and got to play Buffy herself in an amateur production of "Once More With Feeling", probably because I could carry a tune without a bucket, kick higher than my head, and land a one-handed cartwheel in drop-splits. It was one of the most empowering experiences of my life. And now I've been telling my little nieces fun, silly stories about The Slayer, praising their kickboxing skills, and telling them that they don't have to be afraid of any monsters, because they can be Slayers too. It breaks my heart that this source of so much joy that I'd wanted to share with them as they grow has turned out to be so deeply tainted by exactly the sort of abuse that I wish didn't exist in the world that those precious little monkeys are growing up in. I'm so conflicted right now, and it feels like something precious has been pissed on by one more straight, white, f*cking man. How much more of this do we have to take?
I just want to say that I appreciate you being able to voice your opinions and disagreements in a smart, polite and constructive way. Keep promoting kindness to people, we need more of that in the world
I agree with this completely. I'm one of those people who grew up watching Buffy - my stepdad literally gifted me the CD of the musical for my 9th birthday - and it's inseparable from who I am as a person. I was lucky enough to grow up with a feminist, activist mom who taught me about these things, but Buffy allowed me to see a lot of those ideas played out on screen. It was also my first exposure to a lesbian relationship as a young bi girl, though Tara's fate always felt like a betrayal (I guess it's less surprising, now).
I even wrote a research paper about it a few years ago in college, and learned that there's an actual phenomenon that's been termed "the Buffy effect," where researchers found that when audiences watch shows that contain violence against women and the women fight back, it literally leads those audiences to have more feminist beliefs, where the opposite happens when audiences watch shows like Game of Thrones (violence against passive women).
Buffy has shaped our society & had such a positive influence in a lot of ways, which makes it even harder for me to grapple with the kind of person Joss really is. Especially since I'm now an abuse survivor, myself. And with that, I can't help but wonder if Spike's storyline in the end of season 6- beginning of season 7 - and the way Joss had these issues play out in general - could've influenced me to ignore & excuse things that I shouldn't have in my own abusive relationship, that started when I was only a teenager.
It's just so complex and kind of heartbreaking.
@Jaycee Maxwell: Thank you for calling for kindness toward people who have a different take on this issue or make a different decision for themselves. Nathaniel (do they still call themselves that? I keep forgetting their pronoun preferences and whether they changed their name or not) is usually pretty good about that, but they got obnoxiously self-righteous in the video about why they think you can never separate the art from the artist and it made them super insufferable in that one video.
I said this on a different vid, but Whedon only has 1 plot. Pretty young woman, father figure and oddball friends. It's the writers and actors who brought the shows to life and made them special.
It's good to see someone actually nuanced offer a take on this subject.
Also there was always a point in EVERY Whedon story: the main hero gets angry and tells everyone to shut the f*ck up and that they are in charge. Then everyone is humbled and say "Oh you were right, grand hero!" Meanwhile, the whole story before was about teamwork. It was always: "It's teamwork until I the REAL boss says so." I've always cringed at this. (Most fans say "I HATED when they kicked Buffy out of the house. Me: "Thank god they kicked Buffy out of the house. At least she got some humility. Too bad it was never addressed that as a good leader you do NOT trash a child who committed suicide, lie, and are clueless as to who people on your team are. Mal (a man in Serenity had no humbling moment.) This is why I've always had issues with his main heroes and liked the "anti-hereos" more (ie. FAITH & Spike) I always thought this was one of Whedon's internal struggles, when to be a leader and when to let teamwork be a thing. What I didn't know was that he had ZERO insight and little empathy around the issue. He really thought the moments where Mal and Buffy start screaming at everyone that they could either jump ship or listen to them were true kick-ass moments and NOT character flaws. How ironic that often in those moments in Firefly and Buffy if the characters "jumped ship" they would have died. They really had no choice. In RL the actors wouldn't have died, but what choice did they really have: to be blacklisted and quit their livelihood or listen to him.
I dont know.Part of being a leader is making choices that not everyone is going to support.There is going to be a time were a leader has to put his/her foot down and say " This is what were doing,if you dont like it,leave'
Doesnt mean that teamwork isnt important.Its just acknowleging that at the end of the day its your choice to make.
Whedon doesn't get to take the sky from me.
Shiny. I feel like going River on his ass right now and then leaving him for the Reavers, but I swear by my pretty floral bonnet that he's not going to ruin anything that has made my life more meaningful.
Also, in the spirit of taking back the fandom like the HP fans have been doing, new headcanon: Captain Mal is trans. (This afab genderfluid critter who began learning to sew over a decade ago just to make a proper Mal browncoat and tight pants for con wear will take this to Serenity Valley... ;D )
Has he even tried to take the sky from you?
@@robertstevenwilson3349 Some people don't need to try to be a blight on all they touch.
@@robertstevenwilson3349
Every day.
And he's trying to fold up The Sun.
@@alanpennie8013 New report: Michelle Trachentberg was lying, the was no rule that Joss Whedon couldn't be alone with her onset. Also, Charisma Carpenter was frequently tardy, her poor work ethic lead to many crew and cast members being upset with her....
Maybe all the hate for Joss Whedon is undeserved.
Curiously, if you look at the past, at say, a film star being found to be gay in the days before this was “acceptable” they would have experienced the exact equivalent of today’s cancel culture.
What’s changed, for the better, is societal norms and what triggers the process of cancellation.
Now it’s being racist, transphobic..or a general a-hole.
Then it was being black, gay or perhaps causing trouble for the a-holes.
Not gonna lie. I'm glad I bought my copies of Firefly and Serenity from a second hand store.
piratebay.
This is a wonderful video, glad you are lending your voice to the "Nuance is A Thing" movement!
Agreed! I'm so sick of people living with a black and white, with-us-or-against-us attitude toward everything. Nuance and context are important in understanding any situation, and if we're going to make any meaningful changes in this messed up world, we need to stop with the divisive arguments between people who should be allies, and work to better understand each other instead. Otherwise the Whedons win.
I also worked for someone like Whedon. Strange thing is that when he quit and we got a good, happy, friendly boss who gave us every opportunity to succeed many people quit and followed the evil boss to his new job! Same job, less pay and 20 extra miles to get to work. I will never understand people.🤔
I think a lot of people find ways to justify putting up with abuse, so much that when the opportunity to escape it comes up, they reflexively choose to continue an abusive relationship (personal and professional) rather than admit they've been a victim or enabler.
@@04beni04 Power dynamics are incredibly complex in life and abusive relationships. It is often the vulnerable who get singled out because the person in power knows the options can be few to none. Then sometimes you start to believe you are nothing without them or that they are the only ones who value you. Charisma Carpenter even said this in her twitter statement that she sort his approval for years post buffy. Emotionally abusive relationships of all kinds are insidious, exhausting and hard to understand. The abuse can leave a mark on your soul that is toxic and takes years to begin to understand. Add to that the fact that there often aren't direct physical signs of abuse (stress though does manifests in many ways ptsd anxiety eating disorders...) and things get even more complex.
if you notice, whedon used a lot of the same actors and actresses in his various shows. they apparently followed him around too. why wouldn't they? he's a creative genius in spite of his alleged assholishness.
He's a bad person, but his work helped me grow in ways that allow me to recognize his badness. Ironic.
What I think is interesting about these discussions is that it's mostly framed in moral terms. Like, should you cancel Joss Whedon because he has done reprehensible things? How should you feel about the Gina Carano firing? I think those are worthwhile discussions and complex topics, but I also think we run the risk of conflating moral actions with political statements.
Here's my point: I could stop streaming all of Joss Whedon's tv shows and movies today, and it won't make one bit of difference in how WarnerMedia or any other corporation interact with Joss Whedon or his employees. I could organize 1,000's of people to do the same, and if all they did was stop watching Buffy, WarnerMedia may be savvy enough to notice that this is because of the allegations, but it will be left to them to decide which action to take.
If the discussion is about what we want to see happen to Joss Whedon or how we want the industry to change, then framing the question as, "Can you still watch Buffy?" handicaps those efforts. The questions needs to be, "What are our goals? Should we organize to achieve those goals? And how should we do it?" I think that in some ways, you see a little of this in the Harry Potter fandom because people are organized and HPA and other fandom organizations have released clear statements about how they feel about Rowling and future interactions with her. At the same time though, we have yet to see any specific demands or WarnerMedia or an organized boycott of say, Harry Potterland or subsequent Fantastic Beasts movies (and obviously, you can argue with a pandemic and no forthcoming movie, the timing may not be right to announce such a boycott).
In order to call for actual change, you need to have clear demands and clear consequences if those demands are (or aren't) met. Otherwise, the question of "should you watch Buffy?" is about how you live with yourself. It doesn't have anything to do with repercussions for "cancelled" creators.
Or just not care. He didn't beat anybody, rape anybody, or kill anybody. So why do you care?
@@robertstevenwilson3349 These three things that you mentioned aren't the only reprehensible things you can do to someone. Everyone who has ever worked in a hostile (meaning aggressive, unfair, verbally and emotionally abusive) work environment knows how horrible it can be and I think it is fair to not want to support it. Of course this is a personal choice and like Nathaniel here said, you should not expect or pressure anyone to do the same as you - but I think it's fair that people who want to fight against this kind of abuse DO care.
Honestly if like an author's work, calls for cancellation and all that does not affect my opinions and say watching, buying etc of their works.
So not going to stop liking, watching, buying etc Harry pottery related stuff can of JK Rowling, same with anyone else unless I feel like not doing so.
@@rarazalproductions519 I have worked in a hostile work environment before. You know what happened, I quit and got another job, instead of whining and crying about it. And once I stayed, because the money I made and the other people I worked with were worth putting up with one asshole every once in a while. And guess what it didn't traumatize me because some one was mean to me a few times...
@@gabnel1000 That's what piracy is good for. Hahaha 😁
I agree with this. I used to be one of those people who thought that when someone was 'cancelled' that you were able to separate their work because you were supporting the work of the other people but now I think that there's no way to actually separate the work from the artist. I was a massive Harry Potter fan (growing up I would create fanfic in my head, imagine myself being part of that world; I have the books, merch, etc. Now, witnessing how much harm Joanne Rowling is causing to the trans community is just too much to ignore, especially considering that she used her experience as a victim of abuse to justify her reasoning of why trans women shouldn't be able to use their gender's bathrooms is truly awful. Harry Potter was my world but now I can't stand it because of J.R's views. I want to support the actors who have spoken against her views and I'll do it by watching their other works and not HP.
Daniel has been in some really great stuff (and some really weird stuff) post HP and I've enjoyed most of it. Emma Watson continues to be in great movies, beauty and the beast aside. The rest of the cast I've had a hard time keeping track of sadly
Your point on the fans of video games industry is 100% on point. Crunch culture keeping happening b/c the big name studios knows that there are a lot of people who will still buy their products. Sadly I don't see this changing anytime soon - too many people just have to play with the shiny new game. Workers need to band together and fight for better working conditions if they want to change - though not all fans will agree with that. I've seen many a comment in the past when gamers have tried to fight back for better conditions only for fans to respond with "Ungrateful! They should appreciate what they have!" "I'll gladly take their job if they don't want it!" The gaming community is in serious need of self reflection.
First of all, agree with your position on the workers, more workplace democracy is necessary.
As for the point about crunch culture, that's why I respect how Nintendo make their games. If a game isn't ready by the time they promised it, they just delay it instead of overworking their employees.
If you want to support victims, support their other projects. If you can't find something maybe respect their desire to distance themselves from public life and find some struggling independent creators to support.
Your hair's cool, but your lashes are awesome
If you were to cancel every single actor who's worked with Roman Polanski since leaving the country and with Woody Allen since 1992, that means you'd have to cancel Adrien Brody, Ben Kingsley, John Cusack, Scarlett Johansson, Helen Hunt, Cate Blanchett, Ewan McGregor, Robin Williams, Billy Crystal, Hugh Grant, Hugh Jackman, Javier Bardem, Penelope Cruz, Josh Brolin, Alec Baldwin, Greta Gerwig, and Kate Winslet to name a few.
No. It simply means we don't need to consider if they are harmed by a boycott of ventures they participated in with him if they did so despite being informed.
I feel comfortable watching Buffy, for example. Those actors had no reason to know they should avoid working with Joss. But if you work with Joss now, and viewership is low on a project because of it, that's on you and the studios.
Though it is still complex because many people in the industry don't have the option to turn down jobs.
But I don't see a way to make change going forward except to speak with our support or withdrawl of it.
On the flipside, it hurts my heart that people who expected to have a good time on set, like Michelle Trachtenberg who was a child when BTVS started and was a fan when cast as Dawn Summers, found themselves being mistreated/needing to be protected by the person who created this work they love and now are a part of... Then there’s Amber Benson’s bitterness over knowing she’s going to be offed and not being able to call them on lying to the fans that Tara was supposedly safe, or James Marsters being threatened (and later, forced to do something traumatic like the rape scene, which I’m convinced was an attempt to make the fans hate Spike...) Brr!
@@borjankosarac3645 Ummm question? What did Joss Whedon do to Michelle Trachtenberg? Are you equating killing off Amber Benson's character with abuse?
Plenty of actors have had to film rape scenes, see there is this job called acting, where people play characters, usually someone else writes the script and the actors job is to act out what is in the script. Wow, did you know that sometimes people write stories where bad things happen? And actors who would never do those things in real life, pretend to do them? It's part of this process, I'm not sure if you've heard of it, it's called filming and producing. And this thing it happens when people make TV shows or movies. So umm yeah the magic box in your house, the people in there they aren't really fighting and killing each other, they are just pretending.
@@robertstevenwilson3349 I'm not equating the killing off of characters with abuse; I do however think that creators who promise their fans to NEVER kill off characters (like Whedon and others on BTVS did) are in poor taste, especially when they do so to try and retain shock value. You can just say "no comment", which was what Benson did; she actually understood the LGBT+ fanbase were getting something vital from the Willow/Tara relationship, from what I gathered... As to other issues she personally had with Whedon, I can't say as I don't recall in what way she spoke up besides that and in support of Carpenter.
On Trachtenberg, apparently people on set were concerned about leaving her alone with Whedon; probably a good thing in general to get into in GENERAL given how some people abuse their power when alone... but from what I gather he was verbally abusive or something? A running theme with him, beyond his ex-wife's accounts of him sleeping with multiple women he worked with, is that he'd be "casually cruel", mocking people with humour as a justification and stuff like that.
@@borjankosarac3645 So he did nothing to her that you know of? I mean shouldn't a minor not be alone on a set anyway? To me it just sounds like what should be a normal protocol, not a red flag for abuse.
Yes, he cheated on his wife. Because of that she divorced him. "casually cruel", and mocking. Those are vague accusations.
Killing off a character is something that writers do all the time. Making it a big deal because a gay character died seems a bit ridiculous, shouldn't people be happy the character exist in the first place?
By the way, love the hair style in recent videos! The braid with shaved sides is giving me Treasure Planet vibes and it's awesome.
I ADORE Treasure Planet! Captain Amelia 4 eva!
I kept saying the same about the Cosby Show. Yes, Cosby is the star, but there are some great moments without Cosby. All of the cast performed beautifully. Another point, Michael Jackson is dead and he has 2 kids that still inherit residuals from his catalog. Buffy got me interested in How I Met Your Mother The American Pie Series, Cruel Intentions, Bones, made me smile ear to ear when I saw Anthony Stewart Head in "School Reunion" Or when James Masters was in Torchwood. Because of Firefly, I enjoy a little more of Moana, Dr. Horrible, The Deadpool movies, Zootopia, The Flash, Castle, Guardians of the Galaxy, Gotham, Frozen, and need to see Resident Alien. A good show, can raise a fandom to a great actor. This is how spin offs happen, people enjoyed Buffy so much and loved the characters Cordelia and Angel, they were moved to the new show so they can expand further as well as the ones that remain.
I discovered your channel just yesterday and you are a very wise person. I never was a fan of Whedon's work, and I am tired of hearing about him lately, but the way you are analyzing the discourse around the situation and showing multiple perspectives is so good that I don't mind (and even with my dislike for Whedon and being tired of the situation - I recognize the fact that this is important and needs to be discussed)
This is such an important discussion. I admire how your videos always address the complexities of each of these topics.
Haven't seen the whole thing just want to say the lipstick looks good.
Even though I'm absolutely appalled by what has come out about Joss Whedon, I'm still planning on watching Buffy the Vampire Slayer. It holds a special place in my heart because it's gotten me through some really dark times in my life. If I get yelled at in the comments for making this decision, so be it. I just felt like I had to say something.
I'm in the same place. Buffy and Firefly have been very important in my life for personal reasons. But I'm not touching anything else that Joss Whedon ever does.
Buffy was my first love .. and she will be my last :D
Buffy is my future, my present and past.
No Whedon is going to take that away from my, although it would feel better if he toke notes for now on and recognised his behaviour is/was out of line.
To live without Buffy
Would be impossible to do
In this world of troubles
Buffy pulls me through
*Applause for poetry!*
The really weird thing about that defence being used against the video game industry - as you mentioned as a side-note - is that no-one seems to get residuals in video games. That's one of the things VAs went on strike for a few years back. And didn't get.
Here’s the funny thing. Freedom of association exists. Someone pisses you off, you have every right to limit or cut off that association. It’s not necessarily an all or nothing deal and should really be up to the individual. I don’t really do crowds in any capacity and avoid direct association with organized groups by reflex.
I consider charisma a menace rather than a positive attribute in and of itself, so I rarely play follow the leader. Learned that lesson early.
It kinda carries over into my whole thing about personal taste. It’s personal. If you think you have a right or obligation to say what does or should speak to another, I’ve little time for you. Thus, if people WANT to walk away from everything associated with Joss Whedon irrespective of all the other people also involved, nobody can or will stop them. Even if they want to do it en masse.
Funny all the folks who advocate “voting with your wallet” take offense when people actually do so. It’s like they don’t really mean it.
What I want most of all is to see this kind of thing cut off at the knees, so people like that don’t get the power to feed off others’ successes at all. Tired of teapot tyrants of any stripe who think their tiny bit of power makes them like a god in their own universe. Tired of them feeding on the insecurities of others for their own gratification and satisfaction.
It tends to leave a stench and a stain people have then to decide if they can live with. Without other people getting offended at their reactions, perhaps?
Nobody is ever obligated to react in a way someone else prescribes. It’s nice when they do, I suppose, at least nice for that other party. But this expectation that the majority of folks should swing one way or another based on the shifting of the crowd as a whole?
Nope. Not for me. Joss Whedon can go eff himself. And maybe everyone else should start looking at “difficult” actresses in a different way. Who says so, and why? When someone suddenly doesn’t get work anymore, is there a reason for this we should question? I do. All the goddamn time.
It’s one reason I’m looking for more women among the writers, directors, and producers. Not that they’re immune to this sort of thing. It just seems a bit rarer, and the power dynamic is all wrong to be well hidden for too long. Hopefully.
It may be the best and easiest resolution is to call them out early rather than letting them burrow in like ticks.
And in all honesty, it’s not necessarily a bad thing to watch something you still might still enjoy while still considering one of the creators to be a deeply flawed individual, AKA an “asshole.”
He’s hardly the only creator for any of it. Thank gawd.
It’s a bit like the Perlmutter era of Marvel television. SOME of it’s better than fair to middling. Some of it’s great. Perlmutter is still a goddamn stain. IMO.
Then again, I read the original Eternals comic and wanted to kick Jack Kirby in the nards. I never liked his artwork all that much, but the writing in that comic is just “ugh.”
And Marvel is going to take this deeply misogynistic comic and more or less turn it on its ear. I’m all for it. Marvel studios consistently delivers. Even when a specific asshole brings down the overall quality in some fashion. Lot of people involved. Not just said asshole.
Mileage varies. People can do what they want. Even if I don’t personally agree. Then again, I only marginally care what other people think. I don’t believe in “guilty pleasures,” so make of that what you will.
Sorry, I totally disagree with this, I believe you can separate the art from the artist, it reflects a kind of maturity to do so. I don't like Opera composer Richard Wagner's views, but I like his music, I don't like some of Ian Fleming's views, but I love the Bond books.
I think it's a little different when the person/people involved are still active and influential. I agree with you about both Wagner and Fleming, as it happens, but they're both cultural relics. I'm not going to stop rewatching Firefly or Buffy or Avengers either, but I will be reluctant to support any future Whedon projects -- or, as with Polanski and Woody Allen -- those who support him openly and professionally. (Like Tarantino and Kate Winslet and all the other defenders of art over artist.) Not going full-on "cancel culture", just less willing to give them any of my hard earned money. After all, I watch this stuff for escapism and enjoyment. If I'm looking at the screen and more disgusted by the people I see on it than entranced by the story or characters, it's neither.
I think so too, we can separate art from the author. I grew up watching and reading Harry Potter, it was a huge part of my life, I made many friends because of it, my love for books came because of it. And I still love it and think is a good story, beside its flaws.
I won't be supporting JK Rowling from now on. But I'm not gonna be an hipocrite like some of my friends and pretend HP is this horrible thing that I hate now. It is just stupid.
@@04beni04 I believe in the phrase, trust the art, not the artist, people are flawed, their views vary depending on a given situation. Cancel Culture is a two way street, which people don't seem to see. The activists who cancel celebs or artists themselves, they can be canceled as well, their personal information can be traced, in some cases, their employer can be contacted, and the claim can be made that activist is engaging in "hate speech", it's a slippery slope.
I appreciate how careful you always are to distinguish between judging creators and judging people who find value in those creators' works. You are clearly well aware of the pitfall on the other side of the road, where "Joss Whedon is a harmful director to work for" becomes "Joss Whedon's works are bad shows to watch" becomes "People who like _Buffy_ condone harmful behaviour". (I've seen that kind of judgement create toxic environments precisely in discussions where people were trying their hardest to expunge the toxicity of the original creators.) It does seem exhausting the way you have to keep clarifying and nuancing what you say; I want you to know that your hard work doesn't go unappreciated.
thanks for doing these. Been talking with my daughter about this kind of thing and how for old guys like me, it's easier to separate artist/ art, because a lot of the jerks who made stuff are dead and gone, but now, we are knee deep in it, and most of the jerks are still around and have a book deal. It's messy and depressing and we need to have the kinds of conversations you are presenting in your videos, in order to make the hard, personal choices.
I would add that, regardless of where each of us lands in our own reflections on this, one thing we can all do is support the continuing career of whistleblowers (the technical term for an employee who calls attention to something illegal going on in the workplace). I don’t know enough about US law. In the UK, there are legal protections in employment law for whistleblowers, although they still don’t remove significant risk from individuals who step up. But I imagine the creative industries have their own set of issues for people who get labelled “difficult” because they have called out problematic behaviour. This is largely why people often only speak out years later.
So, wherever you land on Whedon’s past work, maybe seek out Ray Fisher’s body of work. Recommend it to friends. Tell the decision makers that he’s a financial advantage to their products. We can do our best to ensure that losing one role (no matter how career enhancing it might have been) for advocating for yourself and colleagues will not have a future knock on effect.
The protections in the US, like many employee protections, are easy to work around because the legal burden is on the employee to prove that they were retaliated against specifically for whistleblowing and there’s nothing to do about the issue of future employers not hiring them (which is the bigger long term issue in a gig work environment like film).
But what if the whistle blower is just a not very good actor who can't get decent roles anymore looking for someone to balme? Or just a complete lying asshole doing it for publicity, like Amber Heard?
@@robertstevenwilson3349 Maybe it's better to risk rewarding someone like that then to risk enabling an abuser and/or punishing a whistleblower. In any case, when someone has similar accusations against them from as many different people as Whedon, it's unlikely that all the accusations are lies.
@@adamdavis1648 So risk rewarding a con artist, and try to destroy someone's career, with no evidence or proof, just one-sided information, because it's better than minding your own business, because maybe someone you have never met, might not be punished the way you see fit, because it's possible they might have been a bit of an asshole a few times in their life. Gotcha. I wish I was as morally superior as you. Unfortunately I have made a few mistakes in my life. I am glad you are the shining beacon of perfection, it must feel fantastic.
@@adamdavis1648 And isn't someone who is using their platform, to attack another person's career (Amber Heard) and character, because of a 20 year old grudge (Charisma Carpenter), also an abuse of their power and position?
This is a deep rabbit hole.
How deep are rabbit holes really? Has anyone measured?
@@robertstevenwilson3349 according to google 3 inches
@@dualipastan So not very deep. figures.
@@dualipastan well google is wrong, thats the diameter they can dig up to 15-18 feet depending on conditions.
@@robertstevenwilson3349 well since his research was wrong...
Yes because Buffy is made by lots of people not just Joss Whedon. I agree that anybody who works for problematic people after everything comes public can't claim "collateral damage."
Being "cancelled" and being held accountable for saying or doing racist, sexist, or violent things aren't the same thing.
I hate and physically cringe at the word "cancel". So many people abuse it and accuse people who are just pointing out bad behavior or "cancelling" or "thought policing". I agree that we should give people the opportunity to grow past their mistakes and we shouldn't cancel them over mistakes they made in the past or present(note that I said mistake and not crime there, crime is a completely different situation), but I also think we should have the right to call celebrities out without getting accused of trying to ruin their lives by their deranged fans.
What I'm trying to say is criticism =/= cancellation, you weirdos
@@rainyrouge5123 that's what you think, and I happen to agree with you. Everyone, no matter their background, is open to valid criticism. But to think that there aren't a sizable number of people who dont recognize nuance and context and perspective really do wish to cancel people. Cancelling is not criticism, but it most certainly is a thing.
I suppose the people who burned and hanged women in Salem also believed they were holding them accountable. They are VERY few cases in which a person who's "cancelled" says outright racist, sexist or violent things. In most cases, they're really minor things like what Gina Carano did. No one deserves to lose their job for making a stupid comparison or joking about pronouns.
I find it so ironic that at one point he was seen as a champion of women and gave "inspirational" anecdotes of how to write strong women, yet all of this was in the background. I imagine the people who suffered under him listening to that, and the applause of the masses, and not being able to say anything.
I've said this somewhere else, possibly under a previous video here, but I've always wondered if they deliberately promote a false side of themselves through their work (either consciously or subconsciously) to hide their real selves.
It's more like it turning out Whedon was using 'feminism' as a "Good Guy Badge".
(Similar to "Virtue Signaling", both refer to the superficial stuff we do to appear as a "good person" without putting a lot of work into it.)
@@l.a.d._vviolet4280 Just an FYI but you might want to change Wheaton to Whedon. We don't want the numbskulls out there thinking Wil Wheaton has gone bad, he gets enough flak for Wesley already. :-)
@@lwaves 👍
@@l.a.d._vviolet4280 That's the first time in literal years that I've seen the term Virtue Signalling used correctly and not just as a way to discredit actual, sincere attempts at being socially conscious. It's genuinely refreshing, thank you.
A lot of great points in the video. I work in film and I think about this stuff a lot. Honestly, the whole entertainment industry is built on crunch and exploitation of labor (what isn't these days?) and like you said, anywhere you look for a problem, you're gonna find it. It is ubiquitous as long as the powers that be keep making it so difficult to hold people accountable. I would love to work in games because they're my passion but it's such a hotbed of toxicity that I just can't do that to myself. What a shame. As for abusers, I often think about all the people involved in the project too - hundreds. I myself voluntarily chose to work with my abuser again knowing his behavior, which let me tell ya is a real mindfuck. But if you really want to support these creators, go through the credits of the work on IMDB and find the designers, animators, screenwriters, whoever's work you admire and look them up. Follow them on Instagram and Twitter. Like their posts to promote them in the algorithm. Maybe buy some merch if it's available. There are lots of ways to support these creators without putting money into the hands of abusers and enablers.
It reminds me of what happened after the final season of Game of Thrones. A lot of people absolutely trashed the showrunners, but nobody held the actors or the set designers or the costumers or the composer accountable for that massive failure. In fact, people go out of their way to say how awesome everything else was DESPITE the showrunners' decisions. So I think there's not as much collateral damage in such collaborative works as some people claim.
I have a somewhat complicated history with Whedon’s work, and what it means to me. This particular situation has been one of the more difficult ones to emerge lately, and it really, really sucks having to have these conversations and think about these things.
I’m currently 33. I had serious addiction problems with alcohol and pills in my 20’s. And in my addiction, I did a lot of terrible things that still haunt me every day. About three years ago I finally stopped abusing pills and getting drunk, and about a year ago I made the call to completely cut any alcohol out of my life. And my life has 100% improved.
During my addiction, there were really only three things that gave me any stability-my family, my friends and the media I consumed. I really latched onto media as an outlet in my 20’s and so far my 30’s, and it gave/gives me a sense of some stability. (I guess you could say it’s similar to how some people say a movie or a TV show “saved their life” when they were going through a rough time, or trauma or grief.) And Joss Whedon’s work was a big part of that. Especially _Firefly,_ which became my favorite show of all time. Hell, _Firefly_ actually became a full-blown tradition at my house, and we watch through it every holiday season.
I’ve lost just about every ounce of respect for Joss Whedon as a person… but I cannot deny that his work made a big impact on me, and is still incredibly important to me. Shows like _Firefly_ and to a slightly lesser extent projects like _Buffy, The Avengers, Dr. Horrible,_ etc. represent more than just entertainment to me. They represent a ray of light reaching out of the darkness. And currently, I don’t want to, or even really feel the need to, just throw them away or stop consuming them. I’ve made peace with the fact they were made by a monster. But I still think they have enough value to me because of what they represent that I will continue to consume them and engage with the fandom. At least for the time being. Who knows what the future will bring?
I absolutely will not fault anyone who disagrees with me, and chooses to no longer consume his work. That's their choice and they are welcome to make it.
Exactly, I agree with you, we all have the free will to do whatever we want. I can only speak for myself, and I am canceling toxic people out of my entertainment. I do it because I can do whatever I want, and I do not agree with the toxicity they are bringing into the world.
In its late 90s TV context, BtVS will always be a revelation to me. That's how I'll remember it. A silly concept on the surface with a wit and sparkle that was just not seen at the time. And it changed TV. But i can't ignore what has been said. Will Buffy come out okay, the way Trek did after all the issues coworkers had with Gene Roddenberry came out? I don't know. Whedon's accusations, especially from Michelle Trachtenberg, are far more disturbing. But I hope it survives as a creation far greater than the flawed man who created it.
The companies cancelling these directors and actors/actresses know their audiences won't watch it any more. Our culture has changed
I don't think this is true. At least in regards to past works. There are I expect far more people who will continue to watch stories that they love even if they don't support the creators in the future. Also there are degrees of being problematic. Holding an opinion that some people disagree with is not the same as being difficult to work with which in turn is not the same as sexual harassment.
One thing I totally agree with how you have been covering these things is that we need to realize our reactions and choices in these matters are deeply emotional. I do not say that at all to dismiss them. It's all the more reason why they are important and why they are such a big issue to deal with. As you discuss, all that emotion is why we do need to take the time to consider the facts and really sort out where our lines are on the issue.
I'm disturbed by the number of people who hate holding people accountable. "Cancelling" isn't a thing, it's ACCOUNTABILITY.
seriously!
Except it isn't always accountability, sometimes it is just mob justice, which isn't always "justice". People are often all too eager to grab their pitchforks and light their torches. People are also often all too eager to only hear what they want to hear/believe, and ignore/dismiss/twist anything contrary.
Really enjoyed this video and found the points made thought provoking!
Thank you for tackling this topic even though you didn't initially want to 🌺💜
Appreciate the nuanced discussion.
Your discussion of video games reminds me of the discussion around fast fashion. I can't support a company in continuing to victimize in the name of "supporting" the victim.
I've seen the same type of arguments around Sia's Music movie. "She's bringing awareness to autism" (sure... while attacking and harming the community)
Real systemic change is going to take time, and yes, a refusal to participate in an oppressive system wherever we are able - while recognizing that we are not all able to take the exact same steps.
This may sound like a hot take, but hear me out: I feel like it's okay to praise a problematic person's merit in terms of talent/creative abilities while also acknowledging that they're, well, problematic people.
I consider myself a fair guy and I give credit where it's due, even if said credit goes to someone whose opinions, beliefs and/or behavior/actions I find abhorrent. Like, with Gina Carano, her recent actions may have made me think less highly of her as a person, but I still think her performance in The Mandalorian as Cara Dune is worth praising. Same goes for J. K. Rowling. Her transphobic views utterly disgust me, but she did give us Harry Potter, a book series I think is very deserving of its critical/commercial success and its place in pop culture.
I don't expect many to agree with me on this, and you know what? That's totally fine and I respect your views on the matter.
I agree.
We now recognise that Whedon treated actors vilely, but there's no doubt that Buffy was actually helpful to many now middle - aged geeks who like her felt profoundly alienated from The World.
Don't know what happened to last - season Buffy mind.
Thanks for the video!
One thing I'd like to add to the topic of the video games industry:
A lot of people who bring up the "but what about the devs" argument seem to not understand how game develop works. It doesn't matter whether I buy a studio's game or not. The devs have already been paid! It's not like they work for free (for possibly years!) and only get paid when the game finally comes out.
Funny thing is, the devs only get brought up when people want to justify why they want to buy a game despite all the controversies. When a game just looks bad or doesn't look interesting there's no one saying "but the devs".
So, yeah ... "but the devs" doesn't really work as an argument.
(And if someone really wants to buy a game/a DVD/a book/whatever without supporting problematic creators or studios, there's still the option to buy it second hand.)
I agree. For the most part, the only devs that truly benefit from residuals after a launch are in the indie or small developer arena. They might get residuals/percentages of sales but that's not the case for the bigger devs. Even if the bigger devs are in line for bonuses, the people above them are still going to be getting far, far more than the devs would.
I am a hp lovecraft fan. And I already knew he was an extreme bigot but still enjoy his books. I do get a kick out of the fact that as a black woman, he would hate me and probably wouldn't want me reading his books. But it's not like he can stop me.
This totally makes me look at Dollhouse in a whole new light. The whole being able to use "dolls" at will and being able to rewrite personalities etc...
The other issue is if you've already bought your dvds and whatnot, don't trash them. He's already got your coin.
I've had to deal with this in finding out several people I've liked and tried to give the benefit of the doubt are unrepentant trash.
I've come to see "Dollhouse" as a covert confession, in a way...
That ending line hits home I hate finding out people I looked up too were horrible people to some extent. It makes it harder to look back on things I was fond off
Weird question. I'm thinking about growing out my hair and doing nail polish for a more femme presentation. Any tips?
Definitely going to watch the Avengers films, He wasn't running the MCU, he didn't direct every MCU films, only some of them, and he no longer works for Marvel studios. I don't think it's fair to stop watching the avengers films because of him.
I have a friend who worships Joss Whedon he loves Buffy the Vampire Slayer he loves Firefly. And he is just not open to accept in that Josh Whedon is anything but a great guy. I told him I felt similarly when it came to another celebrity but when I looked at all the evidence I couldn't in good conscience support this person anymore
I think we as a society really need to stop villainizing people who do bad things. Not in the sense that we shouldn’t hold them accountable but that we shouldn’t try to literally turn them into cartoon mustache twirling villains. We have this problem of trying to lump people into “good” or “bad” and it makes it so much harder to hold someone accountable. If Whedon made these amazing pieces of art, he must be good, so if you say he’s done something bad you’re wrong or lying. But no one is all good or all bad. Even those who tip more into bad are capable of doing beautiful, “good” things.
We try to paint everyone who does horrific acts into monsters, and while I understand the horror, it just makes it harder to picture your friend, your neighbor, your favorite creator as someone capable of horrific acts. If you see the good then it becomes harder to see the bad.
Is Joss Whedon a terrible monster? No. But did he do terrible things? Yes.
@@KerlyFries I see what you're saying. But a lot of times a person who is a public figure for example Entertainer, professional athlete politicians I'm not held to the same standard. Because people like my friend will say hey I like the stuff you do so anything I hear about you that's bad I'm not going to believe it no matter what. V sad part he's willing to condemn somebody he doesn't like I've heard him do it. That's what I'm saying there are people who are willing to give somebody a pass no matter what they do just because they like their work. Which enables that person to continue with bad Behavior.
@@rinehardt6837 Fair enough. I suppose this is more an issue of parasocial relationships and confusing someone who makes content you like for someone you personally should care about. We think we know those who entertain us, increasingly so in the age of social media and live-streaming where we have more access to these public figures. We certainly need to learn to separate appreciating someone’s work with being invested in them as a person. I think most of us are guilty of it and it’s not necessarily inherently bad to care about someone we don’t know but it crosses a line when we excuse and enable terrible actions because of it.
@@KerlyFries Well said
A couple days ago I realized my young teen son is watching content from JonTron and had a discussion about some of the terrible beliefs that guy holds. Your assertion about not being able to separate the art from the artist is something I've struggled with in the past. I just wanted to thank you for bringing that up as it gave me a good kick in the pants to delve into the idea further so I can try and broach the topic with my son and get him to really consider what it means if he continues to consume content from that guy.
What age is your son? Because removing agency for a young man can be harmful
@@cianbroderick4145 I am not going to make his decisions for him. I'm going to give him information and discuss with him the issues but ultimately he will make his own choices.
Another thing to consider, is that if a show just gets shut down every time someone toxic is involved in some significant way, then those working on the show may be less likely to come forward or support those who do, than they would if the offending person is removed and the show continues on without them, because it would mean the job they were hoping would put food on their table and a roof over their head for the next few years is gone. While it's important to not encourage bad behaviour, it's also important to create an environment where people feel safe to voice their concerns when that behaviour happens.
I have a hard time believing this would make them any less likely to come forward than they already are. Most who stay anonymous or speak out years later cite a fear of being labeled “difficult to work with” and not getting later work.
Being labeled "difficult to work with" and having your show shut down often lead to the same end result, not working. Hell, if the show in question is an actor's first "big break", well, those are rare enough that there may never be another. And there are a lot of people who might speak up even if it costs them their own job, but not if it costs everyone else their jobs too. This might not make people LESS likely to speak up than they already are, but that's only because the tank of reasons not to speak up is already full.
I think it also get a bit more murky when the “collateral damage” is also the very victims of that creator. So- Charisma Carpenter, James Marsters, Tara Benson. Do we give up watching these people who alleged bad conduct, in order to “punish” the perpetrator of that conduct? Even if none of those people receive residuals, these are still the roles they’re known for.
And what about cons? Do we not go see the Buffy actors there? I think showing them support directly at cons is probably a much easier question to answer, but even having those actors there still elevates the work of Whedon.
I don’t have an answer. I just think it’s an additional issue in this case. When the collateral damage is the victim, does that make it easier or more difficult? Do we support them, with the side effect of supporting the creator? Or do we damage the creator, with the side effect of damaging the victim? It’s murky.
Good piece. I don't really cancel people so much as stop enjoying their stuff. I used to love watching Kevin Spacey and Woody Allen. Was quite the fan of Gina Carano.
Now I don't enjoy them, so I watch and think about something else.
I’ve watched Joss Whedon’s work for over two decades. His work outshines his personality flaws for me. I’ll continue to watch his work. I just think he needs to be monitored more on set. He needs therapy. If he realizes his transgressions, learns from them, adjusts, and proceeds with initiating that change within himself into his every daily life and work... I feel that he can find redemption. Second chances do work. People do learn and grow. If Joss does this then I believe he should be allowed to continue with his career. I find issue with cancel culture because it does not leave any room for personal growth. And that is a dangerous game for society to play.
When was Joss convicted? Or even indicted? What offensive posts has he made online?
Fuck "problematic." All the gossip indicates Joss is imperfect. But it first came to a head because of his meddling with the Sacred Snyder Cut. Now its release is pending and the outrage is peaking again.
I hope Joss mends his behavior and earns a comeback. But I will continue to stream his work. And I do have hard copies, which I purchased legally.
I don’t think I’ve seen that lip colour on you before. Very well done. You look spectacular.
As somebody in the animation industry, a little puzzle piece with no influence on the big picture, don't continue to support stuff for my sake. Support sends a signal that there's money in it, so more will be made using the same methods. Support of projects and creators you like means that those projects get made. I just follow the projects, I have bills to pay. I just get a task, and if I don't do it, somebody else will, because at the end of the day, it's just a job. It doesn't have that much to do with my personal beliefs
Because I personally know people who've worked behind the scenes of various movies/tv shows/advertisements and how much they put into each production I can't punish all of them just because of the crappy behaviour of one or two people on set. Knowing myself I'll continue to enjoy the works of Whedon, Rowling etc
A twitter account, Doctor_Cupcakes, had post this tweet "I know this is just shocking but the lead designer of Hogwarts Legacy is Troy Leavitt, a far right CZcamsr who used to make anti-fem and pro GG vids:" One more reason to not support this Hogwarts product. I didn't post the link since that seems to be deleted instantly by YT.
To add to the UbiSoft mention in this video. Ubisoft was said to have their most profitable year yet last year. It seems that the abuse expose did not make a dent in their reputation. Also, an executive who was "let go" by Ubisoft for abuse allegation was allowed to keep his Ubisoft stock. If anybody here interested to learn more about this topic, James Stephanie Sterling of Jimquisition did multiple videos on myriad of problems within the Game industry.
This is awesome! The world needs more content like this - it's like, guided critical thinking! The fact that it's presented so warmly & authentically, & from such a thoughtful & compassionate perspective, makes it even more valuable. Thank you! I ❤️ it.
P.S.: digging the whole aesthetic you're rocking, BTW... are your glasses from Zenni Optical, perchance?
Yes, they are Zenni Optical, she's said so in a livestream
I actually don’t agree that cancel culture is a thing like I don’t believe the friend zone is a thing. People are being held accountable and are choosing what to support and what not to. Nobody is ever entitled to my support. I’ve never signed that contract. Accountability was a long established principle and it significantly predates this outcry that “cancel culture” is running rampant.
I'm not feeling comfortable with "cancelling". It's in my opinion somewhat medieval. If I "cancel" someone I'm being judge, jury and execution in one person. And usually we don't have all the facts.
Yah what?
You just deciding if you don't want to watch/read something based on the director/author's actions.
You get to decide that. No one else. You're not 'executing' anyone. Your decision will probably never even effect people like Joss financially.
I am more worried about targeting people who are innocent
If you buy Brand A and not Brand X at the store, are you then the judge, jury and executioner of Brand X? Probably not. We make decisions where to spend our money, time and attention all the time, and we don't convene a Council meeting to decide which bread to buy in order to keep the balance of power between judge, jury and executioner. I think the comparison is overly dramatic. Entertainment is a commodity we can choose like any other, based on our tastes, or values, or whims.
Thank you for a thoughtful look at the situation.
I think people are going to have to take this on a case by case basis & examine their own consciences. Buffy was already a hit long before I started watching, and some of my friends were very into the series. I only took a deep dive into it after listening to a podcast of a college course in women’s studies that had a lecture on “I was Made to Love You” (episode written by Jane Espinson, who is a fantastic writer). That got my attention.
This is a great take, I especially agree with stuff like how the video game industry often perpetuates its own toxic work environments in big companies, hell look at Cyberpunk for an easy example and Gamefreak (developers of Pokémon) for one I wouldn't be surprised to hear is overworked.
Gamefreak have to pump out the main game for the literal biggest franchise in the world, and they are surprisingly understaffed despite Pokémon being an insanely wealthy brand and they could easily hire more workers and allow the games to be as polished and feature-rich as possible, yet the newest main games are the first to lack the support for various pokémon being available, have got fairly bland game design overall and are famously mocked for the animation quality when Gamefreak/Nintendo (I forget which) claimed that the reason for pokémon being cut was to focus on new models and quality of animations when models were imported from previous games, as were a lot of animations and only some animations seem genuinely great. It's clear if they hired more workers they'd likely have no issues in the game content including all Pokémon, as well as newer, more polished features and better quality story-telling, level design, etc.
The same goes for things like you were saying where certain media just won't be beneficial enough to the ones inadvertantly affected to warrant continued financial support to said media. It's always a case by case basis in stuff in this vein, and people need to make their own informed judgements themselves 100%
I love the fact you'd mentioned the collaborative aspect of TV in "cancel culture," because it was one of the things that had me concerned when people went after Cosby. I will not defend what he allegedly did (by the time he was charged his memory was somewhat faulty with age) but if people wanted to pull The Cosby Show off the air because of him I kept thinking about how this would affect his costars or as mentioned those who worked behind the scenes. While saying that the choice to support is individual it's harder to make the determination to agree when there are others at stake, such as in film or television.
I’m trying to look into the rationale for “cancelling”:
The one you talk about the most is getting companies to stop hiring or publishing problematic creators. And the way to do this is through targeting their bottom line. the difficulty here is making sure that the corporate executives know the reason for the boycotts. If they don’t know the reason, things can get messy.
The other approach would be to try to get problematic creators to turn over a new leaf and treat people better. I haven’t noticed you talk about this much. It may be difficult, but I wouldn’t put it out of the realm of possibility, especially since many of the creators you refer to may consider themselves to be social justice advocates.
So... here’s the thing. If these people are ever going to do better, that’s work that is best done with a therapist, or with intervention from their close friends. And I am neither. And I’m old enough to have seen “maybe they’ll get better” deployed as an excuse to do nothing and hope for the best a few too many times among fandoms.
I like this question, and I've thought about it a lot myself, because to me, the idea of outright taking away a person's audience and potentially their livelihood over what could be just one badly thought-out youtube comment or tweet... well it does seem to have the potential to be disproportionately cruel. At the same time, doing nothing about it isn't constructive either, and I think @Council of Geeks is right here when they say fans are not likely to change creators' minds or actions with just their words... I'd add that to that that any fandom bigger than a few people is *always* going to send the creators mixed messages anyway, so any real attempt at collective communication like this *will* be dead in the water before it's even gotten that far.
And then there's the whole angle that having something like this done to them at all would reinforce a creator's belief that the people who'd do that to them the ones who're evil and wrong.
The only real idea that any of this has led me towards is that if 'cancelling' is your means it shouldn't also be your end goal. If the fans/companies/sponsors or whoever are willing to do this to a person, they should also be willing to give them the benefit of the doubt if they do seem to change.
So the TL;DR, I don't think punishing a person's 'bad' behaviour will accomplish anything if you're not also willing to reward and encourage 'good' actions.
@@SplotchTheCatThing Vera's pronouns are she/they btw.
@@Sugarman96 Good to know. :) Made a small edit.
@@Sugarman96 Vera? Sorry, did I misunderstand something completely? I thought it was "Nathaniel" and she/they.
Edit: I see someone else using "Vera" as well. If someone can explain to me *what* I misunderstood here and *how* this could happen, please let me know.
I appreciated that ending. I have a weird relationship with those kinda statements to no one's fault but my own, as such to make defense when applied to myself, but on occasions such as this it is nice to hear those things and accept them as true towards me. I have some kinda issue(s), but I wanted to I suppose say thank you? Either way, thank you
I said it before on one of the other videos, but I'll reiterate it here... for anyone that says we can't "cancel" problematic creators because it would hurt the other people who worked on that project, most of those collateral "casualties" have worked on multiple other projects. If you really care about supporting the people who did nothing wrong, then you can go to the extra effort of instead watching their other work that doesn't involve the problematic creator.
Tangentially, I'm glad this video reminded me what a terrible video game company Ubisoft is. I'd been Eyeing _Immortals Fenix Rising_ because it looks like such a cool game, however, being developed and published by Ubisoft means I might have to give it a hard pass.
...trying to maintain moral standards really sucks some times.
Just sail the seven seas matey
The problem is if you are not clear, if the movement is not clear it can miss its target. Movie Studios are notorious for missing the point when a movie flops they always take away the wrong answer. So if you are going to boycott something make sure its clear "I am doing this because of the director, actor, whatever." Like I am not watching Justice League, I do not support Heard or Miller for their behavior. I am always clear on this when I say I am not watching it.
@@alexarviso6836: If I took that option, I'd feel even worse. The sheer indefensible scumminess of that company would still taint any enjoyment I'd take from playing it... and I wouldn't even be able to hide behind the delusion that any money spent on the game might help support the workers who made it.
I am enjoying your lovely glasses! Also your jewelry is so fun! Great content! Your shelf is interesting.
Love your hoodie - but almost died loving your haircut XD - My best friend (G) and me (L) were doing that same thing a couple of days ago to one another, admiring our work afterwards and going: "How comes, that with one and the same haircut one of us now looks VERY G and the other VERY L?" 🤣 - And no, that is absolutely not more important than telling you once again how much I admire your wonderful Council! Lots of love!
I’ve never understood cancel culture. Every single person on this planet HAS at some point said something that can be considered “fucked up” or “disgusting” and if you haven’t, you WILL at some point. Everyone is flawed and when I see people get dragged because they said a homophobic joke on twitter 8 years ago, I just face palm because yeah nowadays that’s not cool but back then people were more casual with those types of jokes.
However if someone is actually showing signs that they’ve always been a dick and they’re still being a dick then yeah “cancel” them. But if it’s someone that is currently a good person but they’ve said something in the past that’s dodgy, then nah what’s the point.
That's because "cancel culture" is about as real as the "satanist child abuse" at McMartin pre-school in the 1980s...Don't fall for every convenient buzzword.
I'd also want to throw this out regarding the developers of Hogwarts: Legacy.
The moment the game was announced the devs put forward a press release to say "Hey, just so you know, outside of owning the IP, abd giving us permission to make the game, J.K Rowling has nothing to do with this, we started making the game prior to her horrible comments, and to abandon the game at this point would be a disservice to all the hardwork the team has put in and jobs lost."
Whereas something like Fantastic Beasts 3 entered production after everything JK said, JK is still writing the film, and both the director and cast came back knowing who they were working under, as well as new cast members like Mass Mikkelson who've signed on to appear.
One of these products I can understand judging, the other is a victim of circumstance and doesn't deserve to be condemned the way it has.
Well it now has its own issues as the lead developer has some unpleasant views of his own it turns out.
One minor quibble, I think its a mistake to try to just focus on other positives about Buffy and try to pretend Whedon wasn't a creative genius so as not to praise him. It seems like we're all just mutually agreeing on being in denial to make ourselves feel better at that point. I think its better to be honest and find a way to acknowledge Whedon's positive and obvious contribution to the show in such a way that divorces it from praise for the person. That we conflate creative accomplishment with moral accomplishment is kinda the problem. Just because he created a thing we like doesn't make him a good person or mitigate what he did in the process of creating it, and recognizing his part in it doesn't excuse what he's done or who he is. He's a genius, that's undisputable. He's also a garbage person who shouldn't be put in positions of power anymore, which is equally undisputable.
Love those lashes!! Wish my eyes could tolerate wearing something like that 🤩
...now on to watching the video lol
I find this debate very interesting. Personally Buffy was an important milestone in my life, so I cannot imagine never engaging with it again, I feel conflicted about doing so. I then think about the Cosby Show, and I cannot imagine watching that again, though of course there the problematic person is on screen, so maybe that's a factor. As well as I not being as much of a milestone in my life personally.
Of course, with the collaborative aspect in mind, you can go on supporting the other contributers in their other work, while not recognising the problematic persons continued work. I'll always be ok interested and excited when I hear of new projects from any of the Buffy cast, and I feel that's one way of honouring the impact Buffy had on my life without necessarily engaging with Whedon.
Speaking as a person who has always considered themselves a "Buffy/Angel" fanatic, Firefly obssessivee, everything Dollhouse, and basically soak up the ongoing Whedonverse (Side note: That's an interesting word, isn't it? 'Whedonverse'. It's a place he's been able to cultivate where is the creator and we his subjects. That needs to stop, never again should a person be able to have their own 'universe' imo, it's prime breeding ground for this sort of thing, but I digress) Anyway, needless to say I was enamoured with the man. Like my friends now, I am, as Anthony Head said, "gutted". At least initially, but I'll explain. I've had the time since CC and Ray came out with their very brave statements, and the host of other actors and set members responded, to process and try to understand. I'm not going to say I didn't have that little voice in the back of my head that tried to say "he wasn't always this way, Hollywood turned him into this" or something of the like, sadly I did. I was so heartbroken I was trying to find any scrap of hope that he wasn't always a monster, but that got quashed pretty quickly and I haven't looked back. Interestingly enough, I've also had the pleasure of initially meeting, then over time getting to know and becoming very close with a certain Buffy alum that I don't choose to name at this time because this isn't my story to tell- it's theirs- and this whole thing has made it very difficult to come at this as a fan only. I am very, extremely, completely protective of them now, as are the rest of our friends. Trying to support and build a kind of safety wall around them to protect them from the people who are coming at the actors and actresses with such hostility, victim shaming, blaming and vitriol we are seeing now. Also initially, it's became this awkward thing where, Do you say something? Offer support? Do you let them bring it up, talk about it? In the end, that got taken care of pretty quick because they asked for what they needed in this situation, have been extremely open and honest with what they chose to talk about, and so that's the focus. Making sure they simply know you care and are there. Every person in our lives needs that, don't they? In one way or another, and at one time or another. I'm longwinded, I know, but my point I suppose, is when this kind of thing happens and hits so close to home because this is a person you've admired, I couldn't have said it any better than you did. You delved into the complexities with aplomb, you made sure to be clear, concise. It just isn't as simple as 'cancelling', there's so much more to it than that. I'll be sharing this video with my friends, because I think your take on it, and the other video "A Few Words on Whedon" are important and they should be heard. Thank you for bringing a humanity and sensitivity to this, while still being absolutely clear that this (even though it will, like you said) should not be tolerated. Definitely a new sub, thank you and much love!! XOXO
I keep thinking about things like Babylon 5. J Michael Strazynski is as a liberal writer/producer as you can get. Openly atheist, has worked with the Wachowski sisters on Sense 8, etc. And yet other people working on that show were the exact opposite. Jeff Conway was a born again Christian, Jerry Doyle was a right wing talk show host. JMS never interfered with anyone's personal beliefs, his only interest was that they were good at their jobs. JMS and Jerry Doyle did a number of conventions together, and you could tell they were friends despite being political opposites. Doyle was much better at entertaining crowds at these conventions, which helped JMS out a lot.
I guess my point is that collaborative art often involves diverse and opinionated artists having to work together.
That's a different thing. I would like for more people to try to allow others to have different opinions and ways to live their lives, but the big concern for me is for people to let others be. You pointed out how within Babylon 5 these friendships existed, maybe flourished, which is amazing. Yet when someone's behavior poisons an entire set, or leads to someone having a mental breakdown, that's not okay. It's been excused, even hidden, because studios wanted the money from a popular product, but as humans, we should be better. We should recognize bad behavior and prevent it, whether by getting the perpetrator to change or by restricting the chances of the behavior. But it's very different to describe a show where different opinions were allowed with a director who made some of his subordinates feel threatened, often physically.
I believe you can separate the art from the artist.
There is a old saying "once you put art out into the world, it no longer belongs to just you."
It also belongs to the fans. Or anyone that gets an emotional reaction from it. If a book, film, TV show, et cetera helps you through a difficult time, enlightens you, comforts, educates, that's YOUR interpretation of the art. Sure the artist might have created it. But what a person takes away from it is literally just as important. You can't have one without the other.
You said something similar in your video about HP & JK I believe.
Once the art is released. It is separated in a way from the creator. The monetary thing is another topic. But philosophically the separation can be done.
Canceling is such a strange and uncomfortable discussion to me as someone from a literature background. Growing up on old books, it's so ingrained in me to not care about the creator's morals and to assume that everyone and everything are problematic by default. I get wanting artists to look up to to an extent, but to assume we know them or their intent is very strange.
But then in the context of an ongoing media franchise, there are real questions about how we spend money and whether creators are enabled to do future harm. And that means looking at the work as a product, which while true, feels so at odds with its status as art and creative expression.
You were super clear. It’s weird people would be confused.
Bless your heart for this video. SO thought provoking. Buffy and Angel (though I was a big fan at the time), are easy for me to toss away in light of Charisma Carpenter’s bravery. My only sticking point with Whedon, as a creator, has been his involvement in the MCU. I am a true fan, and The Avengers is still a regular re-watch in my house (raised my 17-year-old daughter in the MCU geekdom, and even converted The Hubs).
Feeling angry, now.
Lovely video!
What I personally support that would help with your idea of fans reclaiming work is much more reasonable copyright terms. Fifteen years of automatic copyright renewable one time for an additional fifteen years if the creator cares enough to do some paperwork would be plenty of time for creators and their backers to profit off a work (if they ever will), but would allow most fans to see their favorite works hit the public domain well within their lifetimes.
Brilliant point!
I don't like the things I've heard about what Joss Whedon has done, about women or about temper/abusive behavior. But I still love Firefly. I can like the Harry Potter books and movies (hasn't read all the books) without liking what Ms. Rowling has said and done towards LGBT and esp. trans folks. Other creative people in the past, similarly, I can like some of their work, while not condoning things they did/said/believed or how they were as people. But yes, knowing that they were like that makes me lose some or all respect / liking / appreciation for them personally. -- That said, being female or LGBT or not white or handicapped or several other things, was, until very recently, discriminated against or, in the LGBT case, considered illegal and immoral -- and those prejudices are often still there for any of those (and other) groups. So we have to be careful to consider what we think is right and wrong, what to stay away from or embrace.
OK, surely there's a deeper question. How 'problematic' does a person have to be to consider enough of a 'problem' to be made an example.of?
What I mean is, where is the line between simply having a boss you don't get on with, or even conflict with and a boss that is actively abusive, and who decides?
For example, I had a boss u was forced, after months of problems, to raise a grievance against. However, the grievance was not upheld, even though I supplied what I considered sufficient evidence to prove my case.
Now, ask me, and this boss was a 'problem' boss who might be a correlation to the Joss Whedon allogations (and, as nothing has been proven in court, its still only fair to refer to the claims as allocations, regardless of our personal belief), however, if you ask the company's HR, he wasn't. So, who chooses?
You have been serving us some excellent looks in your latest run of videos!
Ok, so first thing. Your makeup is perfect, your eyes are absolutely stunning, and I could listen to you talk for hours. Also, I adore your glasses.
As far as the topic goes, it's so complicated. Most of the time, I have no problem with separating art and artist. So far, the only thing I haven't been able to do that with to any degree, is Marion Zimmer Bradley. I own a copy of all of the Avalon books, and a copy of The Firebrand, and ever since I read about what happened with her daughter Moira, and what Marion's PoS husband did and how she enabled it, I haven't been able to bring myself to read them again. Just the idea of it makes me sick to my stomach.
As far as Whedon, and JK, and alot of other harmful creators go, I see it as they had good ideas, and they put those ideas out into the world. Once those ideas were put out there, they became ours to expand on. Those ideas are no longer solely the creators. They are trash human beings, and I cannot support them, but their trashness doesn't change how their work, and my subsequent involvement in the fandoms, affected me. Buffy, for all the various things that we now understand are problematic, and for all it's cringe and camp, was a huge influence on me as a young woman. I got to see a girl be the hero, and not an incidental or accidental hero. A girl saved the world, through her own choices and actions. A girl got to make her own choices when it came to her sexuality. Buffy showed me, as a teenage girl in the late 90s/early 00s, that I could be the strong willed woman that I was, instead of the submissive "lady" that others wanted me to be. Willow helped me to identify and accept my own bisexuality. I cannot change the influence they had on me, and the ways that they helped me to become the person I am, and I refuse to deny that simply because Joss Whedon is a disgusting piece of trash human being. I won't support any further work of his, but I will be damned if that one horrible person gets to take away the things that helped me become the woman I am now.
They may own the rights to their work, but they do not own what that work meant to me, and millions of other people.
This was fascinating to listen to. Never in my life have I ever had a problem divorcing art from artist.
Can bad people have good ideas or do good works? And how do we even determine if someone is bad? And if someone is judged to be bad, can they be forgiven? Murderers are bad, but some of my favorite people are murderers. Can we be friends with murderers and rapists and tax-collectors?
Another dynamic is that people are empowered by success: financially, socially and creatively. And that empowerment corrupts them. The seeds of failure are sown in success. Can we succeed without compromise?
I have two things that are off topic:
1. I miss the hat. It was a good hat.
2. The glasses make your eyes look weird. (Like the overused "glasses make eyes look giant" thing.)
Really excellent advice in these times, and brilliant points, as usual!
Council of Geeks: You cannot separate the artist from the art.
Gustave Flaubert: Imma need a word...
I would suggest that Flaubert expected to be challenged on that. Every philosophical idea is.
@@nancyjay790 AND?
@@nancyjay790 Why didn't you step up and challenge council of geeks, then? What's good for the goose...
Great video, as always! It got me to thinking about piracy (trust me, it's related.) I was wondering if pirating the works of abusive creators would be acceptable to someone who is anti-piracy under the argument that artists (and laborers who helped make the art) should be paid for their work. While I do believe that this is absolutely true for small creators, I think there's some wiggle room for wealthy people attached to big corporate studios who obviously don't require such an income for survival.
In regards to abusive people, and their creative works, I have no sympathy for the loss of money they may experience when fans stop purchasing their art and exclusively pirate it. But of course, I'm not exactly an anti-piracy kind of person.
I genuinely don't know what to do here, I guess I'll just do my best to avoid future content from bad people/organisations I become aware of
It's problematic, when someone has an addiction or a behavior problem, to give them more chances, but they do need to be given the chance to learn better, to heal, to repent, I guess you'd say. When to say, enough's too much, we can't put up with the bad behavior anymore, you either change or you're on your own, is.a really, really tough question. I mean, for one, I've known recovered / recovering alcohol or drug addicts who did great, were great people, but I knew them after they had cleaned up. Also, I can't imagine how hard it must be for someone who is disowned or kicked out or has to run away for being LGBT, even though I grew up staying closeted, for fear my parents would not understand and accept me. And later life has been way too alone and with too many close calls and tough breaks. Some people would say they couldn't accept someone LGBT and would refuse to support them, would make them go away and leave. So this makes me cautious about setting down a no-way, no-how rule about people. Are there some things I can't tolerate, things I think are too wrong? Yes, of course. Would I have a tough time deciding how far I could deal with someone with ongoing problems? Yes, that's a tough one. Am I having a tough time now? Yes, I sure am. Are there folks out there who need help and support? Yes. Would I want to put up with an abusive person? No. Have I had friends or relatives who turned out to be not the people I thought they were, and who ended up being toxic for me? Yes, unfortunately. So I'm saying it's a judgment call, I think. We each have to decide what we can deal with, for how long, and what we can't tolerate in people. I hope that doesn't come across too muddled or wishy-washy.