Quote:
Originally Posted by Ari
|
We watched this the other day, and yeah, that Louis CK thing was bad, although I thought the worst aspect was that he grossly exaggerated what she said as a launching point.
BUT he had a point that kind of touches on something that I've been wondering about. I've seen people acting all surprised when new revelations come out, and I kind of wonder if they know that if you're going to go after the men who do this, it's going to be, like, all of them. I mean, obviously not all, but I wouldn't eat my hat if it were most, depending on where you set the bar. Lots of women, too, and I mean lots lots. And there's only a subset of stories being heard, and that subset has been relatively homogeneous and the tip of the iceberg.
In that piece, Chappelle went on to compare it to the end of apartheid in South Africa, how the problem was so systemic that it would have been not just impossible, but counterproductive, to go after everyone who was complicit, so the solution focused more on resolving the issue without excoriating every single person who was complicit.
So this is something I think about a lot: You remember Antoine Dodson, the "hide your kids, hide your wife" guy? Do you remember the full story, that he interrupted and helped chase off a rapist who'd climbed into his sister's bedroom window and assaulted her as her baby daughter was sleeping next to her? The news interviewed his sister, too, and a lot of internet people were climbing way up her ass because her reaction was apparently not 'traumatized' enough for a lot of people. There were people speculating that she invited the guy in because she was mad instead of cowering in fear or blubbering incoherently. But she was acting relatively normal because, for her, it was relatively normal. It's something that women deal with all the time, and yet, in the coverage now,the media is focusing largely on some of the subsets of women who don't encounter it as regularly. It's focusing on these already pretty wealthy, successful women's stories, including stories about a guy jacking off on the phone.
(Again, that woman's issue with Louis CK is 100% legitimate, Chappelle misrepresented what she said, and the fact that it was Louis CK and not just some rando is a really important part.)
I have no idea if this is what Chappelle had in mind, of course, but I can't help but think that there are probably a lot of women working as motel maids and store clerks and waitresses who have similar reactions to Chappelle's.
In theory, I'm not against the notion of rooting out all the abusive, misogynistic men, and tossing them out of whatever system they've been corrupting. That would actually be pretty cool, at least on paper or in a vacuum. But I don't think a lot of people realize the depth and breadth and height of the problem. That would not be easy, and importantly, it would not work.
Anyway, it was the wrong thing to say, and he did that woman in particular a great disservice by 'summarizing' her position for her. But Dave Chappelle is a really smart, really astute guy most of the time, and I think it's does him a disservice to call that part out but leave out his ultimate point, because it is a valid one.