Annotations
(29/06/2023 à 13:41:33)

« The language of guilt and redemption can provide insight into the dominant narratives about sexual violence (Bloomfield, 2019). Scapegoating, mortification, and transcendence are the three main ways society attempts to restore order. Scapegoating isolates individual perpetrators and calls for redemption through the sacrifice of people’s careers and reputations (Bloomfield, 2019). Mortification is when someone takes the guilt upon themselves and makes amends through figurative or literal sacrifice (Bloomfield, 2019). To reach transcendence, the rhetor relieves guilt by placing the guilt in a different perspective that addresses society as a whole. Scapegoating practices in contemporary media “perpetuates a sense that [individuals] are responsible for social ills and not the systems of communities that enable micro-level, daily infractions leading or contributing to those “ills” (Bloomfield, 2019, p. 408) » (Holman, 2020, page 17-18)

« “While scapegoating may narrow our scope too drastically, transcendence may be guilty of expanding the focus too broadly, ignoring distinctions and unique circumstances that may change how we describe, recognize, and respond to sexual violence (Bloomfield, 2019, p. 408).” This delicate balance of individual perpetrator and societal ill provides a precarious frame for activists to work within. The author finds that rhetors must be cognizant of individual experiences without positioning sexual assault and harassment as an individual problem. Alternatively, by recognizing the systemic and social norms around sexual assault, activists cannot let the atrocities performed by individuals be attributed simply to society. They must also be responsible for their actions » (Holman, 2020, p. 18) » (Holman, 2020, p. 18)

« Comparison and #MeToo media attention. Almost every Keep It conversation around cancel culture and Ansari and C. K. involved comparison to other cases of sexual harassment and assault. These comparisons were often made in regard to an objectively worse or more extreme case of sexual violence. Most often, the comedian was contrasted to imprisoned film mogul Harvey Weinstein (Paybarah, 2020) as a means of making their wrongdoings seem more acceptable. » (Holman, 2020, p. 38)

« Separation of art and artists. One aspect of being cancelled that can be difficult to reckon with is the extent of cancellation. Particularly with those in the entertainment industry, when they are cancelled, does that in turn cancel all of their work? As cancellation is not a clearly defined process, the general public has to decide if they can still consume the work of those whose actions they do not support, » (Holman, 2020, p. 43)

« Another conversation the hosts had under the theme of art vs. artists is that of good vs. bad. Can those who were cancelled still have done great things? And alternatively, because they did great things, can others defend them from bad allegations? This came up in a conversation about Tom Brokaw, a former NBC anchor, after allegations of sexual misconduct. In a response to the allegations, former NBC colleagues wrote a letter defending Brokaw. The hosts discussed the letter and the concept that bad men can do good things. » (Holman, 2020, p. 46)

Changement par #Metoo en humour

« Exemption for comedy. In episodes discussing cancel culture, the hosts frequently brought up comparative cases of comedians and comedic actors such as Kevin Hart. Comedians occupy a unique social space where they are largely held blameless for what they say as cultural understanding of jokes absolves the speaker of responsibility. In the #MeToo movement and in a time of cancel culture, this understanding is shifting. A shift is occurring where comedians may for the first time have to examine who their jokes are targeting and what affect that may have on their ability to operate in the public sphere. » (Holman, 2020, page 47-48)