Board 8 > Which (if any) MeToo-type reveals have impacted your enjoyment of a work?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Not just revelations regarding sexual harassment, although that's the most common issue.

Louis CK used to be one of my favorite stand-up comedians. Not so much anymore, especially considering the content of some of his material.

The Shining is one of my favorite horror movies but it's a lot harder to watch when I learned that Shelly Duvall wasn't acting traumatized.

Achievement Hunter content with Ryan Haywood in it just feels gross now.

---

It's a bit...problematic to realize that "Human Nature" by Michael Jackson is probably about how intolerant society is of pedophilia.

---

I didn't do the final season of House of Cards

---

Yesmar_ posted...

It's a bit...problematic to realize that "Human Nature" by Michael Jackson is probably about how intolerant society is of pedophilia.

stranger in moscow being about how sad the child sexual abuse accusations made him feel is also a bit gross.

---

I already didn't like The Birds but somehow liked it even less when I found out how much of a creep Hitchcock was to Tippi Hedren

---

Finding out Nick Robinson of Polygon was a sex pest really fucking sucked because I loved Cool Games Inc., Car Boys, Touch the Skyrim, etc

---

KamikazePotato posted...

Achievement Hunter content with Ryan Haywood in it just feels gross now.

This has the been the biggest one for me.
---

KamikazePotato posted...

Achievement Hunter content with Ryan Haywood in it just feels gross now.

Yeah this one hurt.

---

Johnbobb posted...

I already didn't like The Birds but somehow liked it even less when I found out how much of a creep Hitchcock was to Tippi Hedren

Kind of insane how movie directors have not only gotten away with continually terrorizing their cast and crew, but been praised for it

People in power abuse that power all the time but we don't usually give them awards for it

---

Never really enjoyed the Lakers after the sexual assault case in 2003. That felt like my first real taste of celebrity disappointment.

---

A lot of pro wrestlers got outed as rapists and pedos, and many of them still have active careers, with Matt Riddle just winning the United States title.

---

None, really.

The intrinsic value of an artistic work shouldn't be tied to the morality of the artist. I can understand someone not wanting to financially support someone they think is a bad person, but to say their work is diminished somehow on a cosmic level is kinda silly.

like Orson Scott Card is a shitlord but that's not gonna change the fact that Ender's Game is one of my favorite sci-fi novels.

not gonna buy any more of his books, but yeah.


---

I don't let it bother my ability to enjoy works I've loved in the past.

But also I kinda stopped my watch of Louis CK's show and probably won't ever bother finishing it.

---

KamikazePotato posted...

Achievement Hunter content with Ryan Haywood in it just feels gross now.

This one sticks with the most, especially since Ryan was so fucking weird in the episodes that you assumed it was just an act.

It also ruins "Edgar is the one in the hole." and "All the pretty things are broken!"

---

WazzupGenius00 posted...

Finding out Nick Robinson of Polygon was a sex pest really fucking sucked because I loved Cool Games Inc., Car Boys, Touch the Skyrim, etc

yeah this was a huge bummer

But mostly I have a rule that anything I already enjoyed is grandfathered in, and I just wont seek out any more of their content. I think I decided that when it turned out the guy from The Orwells was a rapist or something. (edit: just looked it up, and it seems that maybe that whole band is sex criminals. yikes)
---

It might bug me if the person is actually visible (Kevin Spacey in House of Cards), but if it's like music or video games I can seperate it pretty easily. I can't think of any live action type media I enjoyed where someone was exposed, though. I guess I don't like watching Aaron Hernandez highlights

---

not sure I really want to ever again put on videos with Mangs in them even if theyre collabs from someone elses channel and Im just using them as background noise while I do something else. I had already generally dropped Fire Emblem LPs out of disinterest but for Mangs theres also outright dislike now.

thats probably about it. The Rurouni Kenshin author is certainly in do not financially support, though.

---

I only suffer when there's a direct correlation. I don't mind Ryan in AH videos (although it's weird) but it becomes very awkward and bad when he makes a sexually-tinged comment. I had a huge backlog of Off Topic and then I arrived on the episode where they were laughing about how Ryan's body pillow sold the best or the glow-up he had compared to when he started and uh yikes.

---

In miss reading Brandon Stroud reviews of Raw and Smackdown

Dude disappeared from the internet after uproxx fired him

---

Rurouni Kenshin and that Rooftops song by Lost Prophets

Grimlyn posted...

I didn't do the final season of House of Cards

This is all I can think of. No Frank in this season, so who cares?


---

It's a complicated issue. The key thing is how much they are visible in and the sole author of the work. Here are a few examples of varying reactions:

I will never, ever financially contribute to Orson Scott Card. I might read his work in shady ways at some point, but not only do I not want him to benefit financially from me because of his beliefs and even worse, I know what he spends (or spent, at least) the money on. Similarly, I'm not going to buy any JK Rowling books for the foreseeable future, that is until there is a meaningful change of behaviour on her part. However, I might enjoy the Harry Potter books I already own still, because the message of the books is completely counter to her personal beliefs. In this case we can engage full death of the author - but I still don't want to give her money.

However, those are cases where they are the sole auteurs of their work, more or less, and also cases of using their finances and platform to spread hate. That is different from the cases of personal abuse but still a case of someone's status enabling them to do bad things. So let's look at Joss Whedon, who has serious bullying and workplace abuse accusations against him. In this case I think I can continue to enjoy "his work" - because it's not really his. He is just one small part of teams of hundreds in all of his projects. In some cases he is frankly given far too much credit, Cabin in the Woods is a good example. He only co-wrote it, Drew Goddard did much more including direct the film, but it gets thought of as a Joss Whedon film instead of the Drew Goddard film it actually should be. The idea of the auteur in film and television is frankly, completely incorrect and arguably helps to lead to abuses of power in the first place. We should be appreciating the work of all involved, and that's why I can see myself enjoying Whedon's work even though he has behaved horribly - because he's not the only one.

However, it gets weird when that person is front and centre. Take Kevin Spacey (who has far worse allegations than anyone else discussed here) for example, I can't see myself enjoying something he's in because I can't bear to look at him. Baby Driver is one of my favourite films of recent years, and I will likely never watch it again because of Kevin Spacey's presence, even though it is a great work of art full of (presumably) wonderful people who should be supported. Ridley Scott earned a ton of respect from me when he pulled him out of All the Money in the World at the last minute, and the end result is a better film that I would be happy to rewatch that also made the right decision.

So yeah it's tough, but I think a case by case approach is the best one, and what I write above merely scratches the surface.

---

I can't really think of any. It was awkward to see Weinstein's name at the beginning of Inglorious Basterds, and I haven't seen any pre-2019 Tarantino movie since then, but that comes closest.

---

The only thing that has bothered me is Manhattan by Woody Allen because it's literally about Woody Allen seducing a teenage girl, but treated in the form of a romantic comedy. That one was just too on the nose.

It still blows me away that Woody Allen has gone strong as long as he has. Even as a little kid when I heard of this stuff I thought, marrying your adopted daughter is incredibly fucked up, right? And everyone was seemingly okay with it.

MoogleKupo141 posted...

But mostly I have a rule that anything I already enjoyed is grandfathered in, and I just wont seek out any more of their content.

Pretty much this. The only one that has effected me a lot is Joss Whedon, I was a big fan of his stuff like Firefly and Dollhouse. I can still enjoy them but I don't think I'll be checking out anything he does in the future. (Though I think his victorian era x-men show has been killed anyways so that might be it for him for awhile at least.)

---

bryans7 posted...

It still blows me away that Woody Allen has gone strong as long as he has. Even as a little kid when I heard of this stuff I thought, marrying your adopted daughter is incredibly f***ed up, right? And everyone was seemingly okay with it.

Because Hollywood excuses creepy behavior/pedophilia if they're considered a great artist. Happens to this very day.

It mostly affects me if supporting their work allows them the platform to cause further harm

Like Michael Jackson is dead. He cant hurt anyone anymore. That makes it easier to enjoy his music knowing that Im not helping to enable him in any small way anymore.

But if I give Nick Robinsons videos views on YT, Im absolutely enabling him to cause further harm to young women.
---

Thinking about this, I still enjoy tons of old films that have horrible people involved in them (see: every Hitchcock movie, Chinatown), I think it's worse for me when they're just playing themselves like Woody Allen, or clearly excusing their own behaviour through art. Less of a divider there. Or someone who's not 'playing' anyone and is just themselves, that's much harder to come to terms with for me.

WazzupGenius00 posted...

Finding out Nick Robinson of Polygon was a sex pest really fucking sucked because I loved Cool Games Inc., Car Boys, Touch the Skyrim, etc

Like this one was bad, I enjoyed his content a great deal and pretty much stopped watching any Polygon vids when his stuff came out.

Edit: lmao gfax censors Hitch's name

---

andylt posted...

I think it's worse for me when they're just playing themselves like Woody Allen, or clearly excusing their own behaviour through art.

yeah this is a great way to put it

it's like I have no problem with watching an old Chris Benoit match, but if he choked out his wife and son during RAW one time then that definitely crosses the line of not being enjoyable anymore

I dont let the artist/creator/whatever ruin my enjoyment of things. Everyone does disagreeable things on some level and to waste time nitpicking everything they do in relation to your own life is silly. Punish the pedos and then watch/listen to their masterpieces while they rot, I say.
---

Yeah, just to be clear, I don't believe in removing art from circulation because of the author/auteur. I just mentioned "Human Nature" because it's creepy now. I think complicating things makes them more complex, not worthy of dismissal (well, for the most part.)

On the flip side, has anyone seen "Tess?", which was Polanski's first film post-rape conviction. I know that he was planning on making it anyway, but it was certainly an interesting choice to do afterwards. I mean, look at the tag line on the poster. Great film, which I kind of don't know how to take entirely.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/4f/TessPoster.jpg/220px-TessPoster.jpg

---

None at all.

Its a shame because some great old shows are no longer available due to cancel culture.

---

bryans7 posted...

It still blows me away that Woody Allen has gone strong as long as he has. Even as a little kid when I heard of this stuff I thought, marrying your adopted daughter is incredibly fucked up, right? And everyone was seemingly okay with it.

she wasn't his adopted daughter though

---

yeah the one he married was Mia Farrow's adopted daughter with her husband before she got together with Allen. The one he adopted is the one he sexually molested when she was seven

---

Killed CHIKARA and Being The Elite for me. (I think the latter got rid of all the stuff with the guy, but I've already lost my momentum on it) Already wasn't watching WWE but it's that much harder to get back into it with Riddle and Dream around. There was an indy game I was pretty interested in until some pretty bad transphobia allegations were levied against the head guy.

Lightning Strikes posted...

Similarly, I'm not going to buy any JK Rowling books for the foreseeable future, that is until there is a meaningful change of behaviour on her part. However, I might enjoy the Harry Potter books I already own still, because the message of the books is completely counter to her personal beliefs. In this case we can engage full death of the author - but I still don't want to give her money.

---

GameStonk posted...

yeah this is a great way to put it

it's like I have no problem with watching an old Chris Benoit match, but if he choked out his wife and son during RAW one time then that definitely crosses the line of not being enjoyable anymore

Its always awkward when JR talks about Benoits killer instinct <_<
---

Tom Bombadil posted...

Killed CHIKARA and Being The Elite for me.

Well it actually literally killed CHIKARA
---

I had never really seen any Woody Allen or Kevin Spacey movies beforehand with maybe a small number of exceptions like Antz and A Bug's Life. Watching Hopper's scenes in the latter is freaking awkward now.

---

Woody Allen's Manhattan seems to be the big one. As a few have said, I don't think a work being made by a bad person necessarily makes the work itself worse, but Manhattan specifically reads like a defense of those bad things, like a version of Lolita where the author actually expects us to come away sympathizing with Humbert Humbert.

At the same time, this has been known about Woody Allen since the year I was born, apparently. So I think most readings of the films in my lifetime have had to wrangle with this aspect? But I think I saw it for the first time when I was a teenager and ignorant of this fact...

---

Generally agree with Ulti on this one.

Separate the art from the artist. Unless you're supporting the artist in a meaningful way. Like I wouldn't subscribe to a YouTuber that had types of allegations, but I'd watch a clip of some TV show involving a celeb on youtube, cause the latter isn't helping the artist

The only times where it tends to matter for me functionally is with stuff where the artist shines through to the art in an awkward way. Not metoo related but the most obvious example in life for me would be old Chris Benoit matches that involve chair shots or particularly nasty landings on his diving headbutt. That gets a little uncomfortable to watch when thinking the guy's brain matter had turned into a bowl of oatmeal by the time he killed himself

But like Charlie Rose got me too'd at some level and I'll watch his interviews every time no problem.

---

JK Rowling has said a lot of bad things tbh. Not that I care I still love Harry Potter.

So nothing has really made an impact on my enjoyment. I would even give jk Rowling money because in general it seems she gives to a lot of charity stuff anyway so her having less money isn't a big deal. She is just a wrong person on this issue.

---

JK Rowling does seem not understand the difference between Biological Sex (as defined by having XX or XY Chromosomes) and someone's Gender Identity (as defined by a person's own psychological view of themselves).

When that comes up it feels like a very Black Lives Matter vs All Lives Matter sort of thing.

"We are saying Black Lives Matter to call attention to the racial inequality that black people experience"
"Yeah, but wouldn't you say that ALL lives matter too? ALL includes black people too."
"I mean sure, but that isn't the POINT. That isn't the conversation that we're having right now."

.

"We are discussing gender identities because that is how we personally feel about ourselves and how we identity ourselves as people"
"Yeah, but male and female are different things! Chromosomes. Science. Etc."
"I mean sure, but that is not relevant to gender identity. Those are different things"

Like you might as well respond by saying "Lima is the capital of Peru". It might be a factual statement, but it just doesn't have anything to do with the conversation.

---

A lot of stuff, but I used to really love to listen to this one band. Music is really deep and personal, it's the artist putting themselves into it. You can't really separate the artist and the art because a good artist puts themselves into their art, you know? Well, after it came out that he was a pedophile and a rapist I can't listen to his songs anymore, especially with lyrics like, "What difference does this difference in age make?" <<

Rarely has it affected me directly. If anything, it's the indirect effect of others refusing, condemning, and forcibly boycotting those materials that affects me. For instance, it's much more challenging to find a way to watch The Cosby Show, and if I were to, I would do so knowing that I'd probably be judged for it.

---

PerfectChaosZ posted...

A lot of stuff, but I used to really love to listen to this one band. Music is really deep and personal, it's the artist putting themselves into it. You can't really separate the artist and the art because a good artist puts themselves into their art, you know? Well, after it came out that he was a pedophile and a rapist I can't listen to his songs anymore, especially with lyrics like, "What difference does this difference in age make?" <<

Was expecting this to be lostprophets, but I couldn't think of the song, so I googled that lyric. Barely heard of Brand New. Shame another group was broken up over one of their members' misconduct like that. Hope he wasn't as bad as Watkins, but not going beyond wikipedia to look for more info.

---

Forceful_Dragon posted...

JK Rowling does seem not understand the difference between Biological Sex (as defined by having XX or XY Chromosomes) and someone's Gender Identity (as defined by a person's own psychological view of themselves).

No, she does, and that's why people are trying to cancel her. There are people on this very board that will try and argue with you in earnest that biological sex doesn't exist.

---