I Give Up

February 24, 2014 5:55 AM

Alec Baldwin explains why he's done with public life
posted by ThePinkSuperhero (260 comments total)

One may hope.
posted by Confess, Fletch at 6:00 AM on February 24, 2014 [7 favorites]

I find myself in that awkward position of thinking this is a really annoying but well-voiced piece of writing, by I guy who annoys the hell out of me but has some points here that I find worth paying attention to.
posted by lodurr at 6:03 AM on February 24, 2014 [6 favorites]

There is something about Alec Baldwin explaining himself that always seems to make everything worse.

Is it that he sees himself as persecuted when he could hardly be more privileged?
posted by He Is Only The Imposter at 6:05 AM on February 24, 2014 [23 favorites]

I will keep reading, but I find it bewildering that 4 paragraphs in, and after spending time talking with an LGBT group "about words and their power," that he uses the word tranny.
posted by microcarpetus at 6:06 AM on February 24, 2014 [92 favorites]

Seriously? "Tranny" about 50 words in?

I have no previous opinions about this guy, but if that's the best he can do to rehab his apparently tarnished image, he can jump in a lake.
posted by kavasa at 6:07 AM on February 24, 2014 [7 favorites]

I will keep reading, but I find it bewildering that 4 paragraphs in, and after spending time talking with an LGBT group "about words and their power," that he uses the word tranny.

This very strongly reminded me of a certain scene from Something About Mary where Pat Healy is telling Mary about his "passion".
posted by ftm at 6:07 AM on February 24, 2014 [7 favorites]

Yeah, 'tranny' sort of jumped out at me as well (thanks in no small part to the long discussions in these here parts). I hope he finds peace.
posted by jquinby at 6:08 AM on February 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

And I said, “Ding, ding, ding, ding! Bingo, Nick, bingo! That’s who you’re talking to.”

Homophobia or not, I might have hung up on him for doing that.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 6:10 AM on February 24, 2014 [7 favorites]

Yeah, I missed how he was declared public enemy of teh gays or whatever it was, but this made me screech to a halt

One young man, an F-to-M tranny, said...

I said, I want to learn about what is hurtful speech in your community.

He seems like a smart guy in some ways but maybe he's right to take his smartness out of public view.
posted by rtha at 6:10 AM on February 24, 2014 [7 favorites]

When he started writing about Shia Labeouf, all I could do was feel incredibly sorry for every other person involved with that play, because that's a hell of a lot of jackass to put up with in one room. And honestly, if all your put-downs are "cocksucker," "queen," "tranny," then yes, I think you're a homophobic, trans-phobic, over-privileged ass. Go away, Baldwin.
posted by xingcat at 6:15 AM on February 24, 2014 [14 favorites]

I couldn't read every word because it isn't interesting enough. Did skim to this though:

If I offended anyone along the way, I do apologize.

Why do PR guys (don't tell me this wasn't ghosted) do this shit?
posted by bukvich at 6:15 AM on February 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

i think he's spent so much time inside a certain bubble that he really doesn't know what normal folks find offensive. he is an abrasive jerk, from what I've heard and based on the interviews I've seen over the years. i think what we're seeing is "jerk", not "homophobe."

which is worse? depends: some homophobes can be turned, even late in life. jerks, in my experience, more often than not, once they get past a certain age they just stay jerks (or even get worse).

still, hole-digging and all, i find myself admiring the way he writes voice....
posted by lodurr at 6:15 AM on February 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

It’s good-bye to public life in the way that you try to communicate with an audience playfully like we’re friends, beyond the work you are actually paid for. Letterman. Saturday Night Live. That kind of thing. I want to go make a movie and be very present for that and give it everything I have, and after we’re done, then the rest of the time is mine. I started out as an actor, where you seek to understand yourself using the words of great writers and collaborating with other creative people. Then I slid into show business, where you seek only an audience’s approval, whether you deserve it or not. I think I want to go back to being an actor now.

The article was pretty self-involved and rambling, but I get where he's coming from. It seems like a healthy move. I hope it works out for him.
posted by bleep at 6:16 AM on February 24, 2014 [16 favorites]

don't tell me this wasn't ghosted

I think it probably wasn't. I'm sure it was edited -- but a lot of actors, and especially theater actors, write this kind of voice-driven narrative really well. Peter Coyote, for example.
posted by lodurr at 6:17 AM on February 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

The problem with living so publicly is that, like, lots of us know people who are generally good-hearted and actually trying to be decent but who always say stupid shit. But we really know them so we just kind of roll our eyes and are like, oh, well. When you say stuff like that and the whole planet hears you, none of us know if this guy is trans/homophobic? Or just an asshole? Or neither of those but a bit tone-deaf and not good at filtering? And the end result of people saying that stuff in very public ways is that it makes life worse for certain people because it makes it seem like it's okay to talk like that. So. Whatever he is, I do hope we hear less from him in future, but I don't wish him ill.
posted by Sequence at 6:18 AM on February 24, 2014 [31 favorites]

When you lay down with vultures...
posted by Etrigan at 6:18 AM on February 24, 2014

So no more words with friends?
posted by srboisvert at 6:18 AM on February 24, 2014 [7 favorites]

I like him a lot, but he's really making it worse. This comes off petty and tone-deaf. A little break may do him (and others) some good.
posted by Red Loop at 6:19 AM on February 24, 2014

If you can get past the extreme tone-deafness of the first couple paragraphs and his repeated assertions of the difference between vaguely and outright homophobic insults--and I really don't blame you if you can't, it's pretty awful--it's actually the beginnings of a decent piece on the horrible extremes of celebrity culture. Or, more accurately, how something that is celebrated to the extent it is in the US must necessitate takedowns of same by a very fickle audience, led by an unsympathetic press. I don't blame him for taking the route he does, or for people like Kristen Bell and Dax Shepard, who have (rightly, IMO) criticized that same press for the "pedorazzi" fad. Of course, Bell et al are doing it without resorting to the equivocations Baldwin is, so there are better ways of dealing with it.
posted by zombieflanders at 6:22 AM on February 24, 2014 [5 favorites]

I look forward to his next 5,000 word attention-seeking monologue, titled, "See, This Is Me Living My Private Life out of the Public Eye Now, How Do You Like That?"
posted by FelliniBlank at 6:22 AM on February 24, 2014 [20 favorites]

Alec Baldwin has a long, LONG history of this: switching between being Mr. Friendly and sticking his foot (his foot?!? Hell, his whole leg!) in his mouth. His career has taken a few hits because of this: one example is the film "Hunt for Red October" --- because of how difficult he was to work with plus the way he denigrated the movie to critics, the producers choose to pay a higher salary to the far-more-professional Harrison Ford when it came to the sequel, "patriot Games".

I too wish Baldwin was telling the truth when he says things like this press release.
posted by easily confused at 6:23 AM on February 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

For every Rupert Pupkin moment I've ever had, after reading pieces like this (however flawed the messenger) I almost always think "Thank fucking God I don't have this guy's problems," because sometimes just getting through the day is fucking bad enough without having to live in that kind of glare.

Now, since I'm blameless in all facets of my life, I will begin my windup, to throw the first stone
posted by From Bklyn at 6:23 AM on February 24, 2014 [18 favorites]

Baldwin's gripes against the media should include the allowing of him to print that letter without major editorial overhaul. He maybe has a good point in there somewhere, but it is so buried in shit I can't read it without thinking, well I hate you NOW, goodbye.
posted by angrycat at 6:23 AM on February 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

I too came here to say that I sort of sucked in my breath at "tranny" mostly because of posts here.

But jeez, talk about career suicide. At least now the right won't be able to say that the left just hates them but secretly uses all sorts of bigoted words themselves...I think the reaction of the left to him during all this has been "bye."
posted by nevercalm at 6:25 AM on February 24, 2014

I feel sorry for him. I think he's a great actor and I don't believe he's homophobic or tranophobic, regardless of his use of the word 'tranny'. The world is changing fast and it's not unusual for people to be behind the times. He hasn't adjusted yet to what is acceptable rhetoric and what isn't and by god he's paying for it. He's rich and famous and a target for everything that he says and has been for a very long time. I'm glad he's going to back away from public life. It's the best thing he can do for himself and his family. Maybe he'll learn a few things and not have to be so defensive.
posted by h00py at 6:25 AM on February 24, 2014 [26 favorites]

It was As told to Joe Hagan, who writes for NY Magazine. So yeah, basically ghosted.

I'm still just not getting, at all, why he would write this piece and tell a story about meeting with an lgbt group to learn, and use the word tranny in the same paragraph. Did he think it was funny? Did he not realize, and no one mentioned it? Was he Making A Point?
posted by rtha at 6:27 AM on February 24, 2014

*facepalms*

If you claim to be an advocate for a specific group in the same missive as using one of the 7 "Absolutely not" words for that group you only demonstrate your ersatz commitment to that cause.

Rob Lowe had an initial burst of popularity (Child acting, Outsiders, Brat Pack), went into remission, got a new set of popularity by being part of the right shows/wrong shows.

Alec Baldwin on the other hand had a few good movies, but is now relegated (at least in my mind) to schilling Capital One credit cards.

Part of being an actor is only doing things that are going to reinforce a specific perception.
posted by Hasteur at 6:27 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

Seems to me that if you want to remove yourself from the public view, issuing a public statement isn't a very good way to go about it.
posted by baf at 6:27 AM on February 24, 2014 [5 favorites]

>"And I said, “Ding, ding, ding, ding! Bingo, Nick, bingo! That’s who you’re talking to.”

Well he's a consummate performer I guess.

Very big mistake saying "tranny" of course. He seems like the person who doesn't like showing his drafts to anyone before he publishes them. He's definitely getting to the point where he's going to be a grandpa that they try to keep in another room during family events.

He also seems to take a lot of time talking about various professionals he's worked with and how they just weren't into doing their jobs or wanting to be there etc. Does he have vendettas with these people? Maybe he suspects they're somehow behind some of the leaks or something?

You can't blame him for taking down Shia though, that was good stuff.
posted by Napierzaza at 6:28 AM on February 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

This reminds me of when people have huge temper tantrums on message boards and announce they are leaving. Even with the use of the word tranny. Fantastic. So long, don't let the subway doors close on you, Alec.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:30 AM on February 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

Maybe he called like twenty other advocacy organizations before he got the reaction he did. And he just hung up on them when they named somebody else. He started screaming, ranting and raving, and wrote this piece.
posted by angrycat at 6:30 AM on February 24, 2014

About the "tranny" thing, I think Baldwin, bless his heart, was so super proud of himself for starting that sentence with "one young man" ("See, look, I called this chick a man, I've learned, I've got it!") that he just completely lost the thread after that.

Although yeah, you'd think the ghost writer or editors would have caught that, so maybe it was some kind of passive aggressive joke. Because the way anyone normal would have written that sentence is "One young man said, 'yatayata.'"
posted by FelliniBlank at 6:32 AM on February 24, 2014 [7 favorites]

This reminds me of when people have huge temper tantrums on message boards and announce they are leaving.

Screw you guys; I'm going home.
posted by FelliniBlank at 6:36 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

I’m self-aware enough to know that I am to blame for some of this. I definitely should not have reacted the way I did in some of these situations. I don’t have these issues with waiters, traffic cops, store clerks.

This, Alec. Build on this. You're not there yet, but this is the kernel to focus on.

But—I’m sorry, I can’t let go of this—do people really, really believe that, when I shouted at that guy, I called him a “faggot” on-camera? Do you honestly believe I would give someone like TMZ’s Harvey Levin, of all people, another club to beat me with?

Once you append "cocksucking" to your slur, Alec, if you're addressing a man in that tone of voice you used, it doesn't matter what noun you use. It's already become an anti-gay slur. That's that part that hasn't sunk in yet.
posted by ChrisTN at 6:37 AM on February 24, 2014 [7 favorites]

ABC. A, Alec. B, Baldwin. C, cocksucking something something.

He's 100% right about MSNBC and probably 80% right about Maddow, though it is very unpopular to say so.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 6:37 AM on February 24, 2014

I agree with h00py. I don't think he is homophobic or transphobic. Part of this issue may be that he is behind the times as to what is and isn't acceptable to say in various contexts, and the other part of it may be due to the fact that as a performing artist he is, as he says, "awash in gay people, as friends and colleagues." As a performing artist myself, I find that I hear some of these disputed words thrown about with such regularity by and among gay and trans people that it's not surprising someone might think they would be acceptable to the broader community. I would expect him to be a bit more savvy, though, considering that his own article demonstrates the extent to which he understands that anything a public figure says will be portrayed in the worst possible light.
posted by slkinsey at 6:38 AM on February 24, 2014 [22 favorites]

I used to engage with the media knowing that some of it would be adversarial, but now it’s superfluous at best and toxic at its worst. If MSNBC went off the air tomorrow, what difference would it make? If the Huffington Post went out of business tomorrow, what difference would it make? ... They want clicks, I get it. They’ve gotta have clicks for their advertisers, so they’re going to need as much Kim Kardashian and wardrobe malfunctions as possible. The other day, they had a thing on the home page about pimples. Tripe.

He's not, y'know, wrong...
posted by ook at 6:40 AM on February 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

Brandon Blatcher explains why he's done with the pecan sticky buns from Whole Foods.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:43 AM on February 24, 2014 [5 favorites]

There are celebrities that don't have a constant problem with framing ther personalities like Alec Baldwin does. If you adopt a siege mentality and lash out at everyone who criticizes, bothers you, you are going to cut a pretty unsympathetic figure. The only common denominator in these stories of aggression against paparazzo, of public outbursts and personal difficulty is him.

Alec Baldwin chose celebrity. The life of a celebrity has not changed so substantially in the last 20 years that he didn't know what to expect going in.

As for his repeated claims that he's not homophobic:

I didn’t view “toxic little queen” as a homophobic statement. I didn’t realize how those words could give offense, and I’m sorry for that.

I can imagine a world where he doesn't see himself as homophobic and is just kinda clueless, but if he has something to prove, with this and "tranny," he's his own worst enemy.

But I am writing this as I listen to Bad Brains, so I guess it allow myself to enjoy media made by homophobes, repentant or otherwise.

I'm sure he will be unpleasantly surprised if he thinks he can continue to make movies without doing talk shows and press junkets and that kind of thing. As such, I imagine this retirement is temporary.
posted by to sir with millipedes at 6:43 AM on February 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

That this ridiculous non-story has been going on for 6 months and this is the first I'm reading about it proves the health of my daily news feeds. One thing I will say is that I always thought Howard Stern was a little paranoid when he considered any new competitor to be his mortal enemy basically wished them death on a daily basis and seizing on any weakness or vulnerability to gain an advantage. Looks like Anderson Cooper took a page out of that playbook in this situation.
posted by any major dude at 6:44 AM on February 24, 2014

I'm still just not getting, at all, why he would write this piece and tell a story about meeting with an lgbt group to learn, and use the word tranny in the same paragraph. Did he think it was funny? Did he not realize, and no one mentioned it? Was he Making A Point?

If I had to guess - and that's really all I can do here - and if I were to make the most charitable guess I could (because I'd like to think his heart's basically in the right place but I really have no idea), my guess would be that it's a combination of two things:

One, that he lives in the showbiz bubble and probably has some sense that the word is not always the best word to use but doesn't really grasp how jarring and offensive it might be to trans people - the thing about being a celebrity on the level of Baldwin is that you kind of stop living in a world where you ever have to hear the word "no," and I would not at all be surprised if he'd used the word unthinkingly around people who are more social-justice oriented than he is, and they did not correct him because he's Alec Baldwin so he walked away from it thinking there was nothing wrong with the term, and/or

Two, that he talks about it in the context of working closely with LGBT groups in Hawaii, so these are people he knew and likely had a sit-down with of an evening - my assumption is that the trans dude used the word himself (I've known enough trans people who do this that it's not super hard for me to imagine) and Baldwin figured that this was an in-group term and, lacking a greater sense of context, used the word here to try to sound like he's, you know, down with the trans folk, or whatever.

None of which makes the use of the word okay or anything like that, but it's how I at least try to resolve the dissonance between his use of the word and his stated support for the LGBT community. Or maybe he's a total homophobe and transphobe and is just trying to do damage control. I don't know the guy so I can't say.
posted by FAMOUS MONSTER at 6:44 AM on February 24, 2014 [13 favorites]

tl;dr. Did he stamp his little foot, and take all his toys with him?
posted by Cranberry at 6:46 AM on February 24, 2014

Go, Alec Baldwin, to the comforting arms of /r/theredpill, and together share the hurt of your sad oppression by everyone who is not a rich straight white dude.
posted by nicebookrack at 6:46 AM on February 24, 2014

This reminds me of when people have huge temper tantrums on message boards and announce they are leaving.

Seriously. The headline should've been "Alec Baldwin Flounces From Public Life".

I'm not sure if he's actively terrified of rainbow people but when your entire vocabulary of insults are slurs there's no way to come off as anything but a huge fucking douchebucket no matter how many gay weddings you've been to.
posted by NoraReed at 6:48 AM on February 24, 2014 [5 favorites]

I never knew he was "homophobic". A blowhard, know-it-all, violent person yes...but homophobic? Anyway, man, he does go on and on and on doesn't he?
posted by stormpooper at 6:50 AM on February 24, 2014

Yeah clearly some of his language is ill-considered at the start of the piece, but it really is worth reading the whole thing before commenting. I think his points about whether we judge someone in their entirety based on their worst moments is worth considering - most of us are fortunate to have our worst moments not broadcast for public consumption, and can therefore move past them pretty quickly once we've apologized to the relevant people.

I for one would go absolutely mental if every single time I wanted to pop to the convenience store to get some milk or go for a quiet drink in a coffee shop several whipped out their phones in an attempt to get a picture of me and my kid to share with the world.

This is not a "oh how hard life is as a celebrity", but rather a reflection that the points he makes about the cult of celebrity and the media etc are worth taking seriously.
posted by modernnomad at 6:51 AM on February 24, 2014 [56 favorites]

Certain words were programmed into my vocabulary between the ages of eight and thirteen (not the ones in question, thankfully). They were later excised as I learned a little more about everything. I don't think I've ever been so angry that my flailing for an insult reanimated one of those words, but when I try to imagine being that upset I can almost picture it happening. I can't picture many things that could make me that angry, but one of them is undoubtedly an encounter with paparazzi.

I'm not saying he deserves a free pass, or that he shouldn't be displaying more contrition than he currently is, or that he doesn't have a huge way to go. But: paparazzi. It is extreme, serious provocation that—for certain people—never relents.
posted by distorte at 6:53 AM on February 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

Modernnomad.. well said...
posted by HuronBob at 6:53 AM on February 24, 2014

Parts of this thread illustrate that bit about "Even the U.S., which is so preposterously judgmental now. The heart, the arteries of the country are now clogged with hate."

This need to voice opinions about the character of people you imagine you know personally because you read the gossip rags is very disturbing.
posted by Marauding Ennui at 6:54 AM on February 24, 2014 [36 favorites]

"We allowed people privacy, we left them alone. And now we don’t leave each other alone. Now we live in a digital arena, like some Roman Colosseum, with our thumbs up or thumbs down."

Metafilter: like some Roman Colosseum, with our thumbs up or thumbs down.
posted by FreezBoy at 6:55 AM on February 24, 2014 [12 favorites]

Yes, it's the media he despises, not 'rainbow people'. The goddamned hypocritical media who are only after clicks and page-views and magazine sales, paparazzi who are prepared to say or do anything to get an unflattering picture or quote in order to increase sales. He really needs to back the fuck away because it cannot be reasoned with.
posted by h00py at 6:56 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

A friend who is a reporter in central NJ wrote about his encounter with Baldwin a couple years back. TLDR: Baldwin shoved him and acted the arrogant, limousine liberal ass. (Literally with the limo part.)
posted by graymouser at 6:57 AM on February 24, 2014

In his own words:

You know your Party is in trouble when people ask "Did the rape guy win?" and you have to ask, "Which one?"

He's steeped in a political worldview that is terminally out of step with modern realities - he realizes it, but can't seem to pull things together enough to make a meaningful change.
posted by Slap*Happy at 6:57 AM on February 24, 2014

The closer: And, admittedly, this is how I feel in February of 2014.

Not exactly flouncing off screen. More like cranky ranting, from someone we're accustomed to hearing rant crankily. Which will doubtless be deployed to mock him the next time he speaks publicly about his personal life.

The lesson: If you think the media is looking for sticks to beat you with, Alec, stop giving them to them. You may think you've established a brand as a cranky ranter -- they just see it as you stockpiling ammunition in their garage.
posted by lodurr at 6:58 AM on February 24, 2014

This need to voice opinions about the character of people you imagine you know personally because you read the gossip rags is very disturbing.

How about voicing opinions about the character of people we imagine we know because we read the actual words those people wrote that are specifically about their character? If you go to a large publication and say, "I am not this thing" over and over again, then other people get to point out why you appear to actually be that thing.
posted by Etrigan at 6:59 AM on February 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

I get the impression from the comments here that a lot folks read this as:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit, sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat. Ut wisi enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exerci tation ullamcorper suscipit lobortis nisl ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis autem vel eum iriure dolor in hendrerit in vulputate velit esse molestie consequat, vel illum dolore eu feugiat nulla facilisis at vero eros et accumsan et iusto odio dignissim qui blandit praesent luptatum zzril delenit augue duis dolore te feugait nulla facilisi. Nam liber tempor cum soluta nobis eleifend option congue nihil imperdiet doming id quod mazim placerat facer possim assum. Typi non habent claritatem insitam; est usus legentis in iis qui facit eorum claritatem. Investigationes demonstraverunt lectores legere me lius quod ii legunt saepius. Claritas est etiam processus dynamicus, qui sequitur mutationem consuetudium lectorum. Mirum est notare quam littera gothica, quam nunc putamus parum claram, anteposuerit litterarum formas humanitatis per seacula quarta decima et quinta decima. Eodem modo typi, qui nunc nobis videntur parum clari, fiant sollemnes in futurum. TRANNY TRANNY TRANNY TRANNY TRANNY TRANNY TRANNY TRANNY TRANNY.... TRANNY TRANNY TRANNY QUEEN! TRANNY TRANNY TRANNY ANDERSON COOPER TRANNY TRANNY TRANNY.

Here's the thing, if someone writes a freaking novel where you want to take the time to read it and YOU can't get past one word without returning to it and letting it cloud your judgement. They may have a problem, but you definitely have one.

Reading this, he knows he is an ass, and that part of his life he's largely unapologetic about it. He doesn't write this to suddenly have some sort of cathartic change. If anything, he makes it clear that anyone and everyone on the internet that thinks he is an ass won. And now he's (at least claiming) letting us know that you won't have to worry about seeing him around here anymore. He's flamed out, and ultimately he knows you don't care whether he has or not.

Him being an ass doesn't mean that he isn't actually sorry. His evident use of using sexual orientation as a slander is bad form, and shows an ignorance on his part. His continual usage of it indicates that he is unlikely to ever learn what he is saying is wrong. This is why he's going bye bye from public life.

Focus your attention and retraining efforts on Billy.
posted by Nanukthedog at 6:59 AM on February 24, 2014 [11 favorites]

I live between a lake and a swamp.... Sometimes, in the summer, if it's been wet and the swamp remains full and doesn't dry up like it does some years, we get mosquitos, lots of mosquitos. They buzz around you the moment you step out of the house. They make it so you can't open your doors or windows, you're afraid they'll invade your private space and keep you awake all night, bite the kids and make them cry, bite the dogs and spread some illness to them.

Eventually, when it's really bad, you seal yourself away...you don't go outside any longer, you become a bit bitter as you look through the glass and see the green of the woods and the blue of the lake, and know that it just isn't worth going outside, because you can't escape from the mosquitos...

And, when you finally, in a fit of cabin fever, break down and go out, they are on you, even when they don't bite the buzzing near your ear causes you to smack yourself in the head in a preemptive attempt to avoid being bitten again... god forbid you have a hammer in your hand when that moment comes.
posted by HuronBob at 7:02 AM on February 24, 2014 [24 favorites]

How about voicing opinions about the character of people we imagine we know because we read the actual words those people wrote that are specifically about their character?

Nah, that's still pretty lame too.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:04 AM on February 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

It's lame to respond to a piece that was published for public consumption?
posted by rtha at 7:08 AM on February 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

This was very raw. Abrasive, sure, but I get the sense that maybe some of it is because he naturally tends to be abrasive or a jerk, but maybe a lot of it could be because he has been constantly abraded by the paparazzi over the years. I have no experience in public life - but as a woman, I get frustrated and annoyed by the catcalls, etc. I receive when I dare exist in public. For that to be escalated, to be followed by people with cameras who refuse to leave the lawn of my home and for my family to receive the same treatment? Yeah. I absolutely understand that constant current of irritation and defensiveness and objection to the general state of things just under the surface. No one should have to deal with being accosted by photographers entitled to their cameras whenever one dares to leave the house.

I get the sense that he tries to do good and that his heart and money are in the right places. He's smart and thinks about the world beyond himself. Yes, he is totally privileged and by all accounts seems obnoxious to work with. But I wonder if his storming out of the public eye is partially due to the left eating itself, you know?
posted by nicodine at 7:08 AM on February 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

The Problem With Alec Baldwin In One Easy Chart.

Penis. Really?
posted by 0 at 7:10 AM on February 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

In fairness, the author of that chart also has a penis. As do I. They do cause a lot of problems.
posted by distorte at 7:12 AM on February 24, 2014 [5 favorites]

he is an angry, hateful man who does things like call his 11 year old daughter a pig and flounce around about fathers rights because he hates his ex. his outbursts aren't caused by the paparazzi (odious people to be sure), they're caused by his complete inability to control his temper. this is a repeated issue with him. i'm sure most people at his level of fame are assholes, but they mostly manage to not show it to us so much.
posted by nadawi at 7:12 AM on February 24, 2014 [9 favorites]

At some point, most adults realize that the proper thing to say when you use hurtful words is "I'm sorry." And then don't do it again.

That second part is key.

I'm of the opinion if you do it again and again, the it's very likely you're just an asshole. No matter how many words you use to say you're sorry.
posted by teleri025 at 7:12 AM on February 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

> Alec Baldwin on the other hand had a few good movies, but is now relegated (at least in my mind) to schilling Capital One credit cards.

In the article, he says he was paid $15 million from Capital One and had given it all to charity. They did not renew his contract.
posted by gwint at 7:13 AM on February 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

Here's the thing, if someone writes a freaking novel where you want to take the time to read it and YOU can't get past one word without returning to it and letting it cloud your judgement.

Speak for yourself. I read the whole piece, and while I feel a little bad for him that he has a hard time navigating all of this in the public eye, he's also a goddamn grown-up who's had enough savvy to get where he is. Part of that has to include an ability to understand the significance of context in any form of communication. I don't really care about him using the word "tranny" as much as I care about his apparent inability to understand why using terms like that in certain context will get him a raft of shit. Grow up, Mr. Baldwin. It's past time, already.
posted by rtha at 7:15 AM on February 24, 2014 [6 favorites]

Mod note: Comment removed. If you're basically just in a thread to hold the conversation itself in contempt, skip the thread and save everyone else the time and noise.
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:24 AM on February 24, 2014 [9 favorites]

I'm sure most people at his level of fame are assholes, but they mostly manage to not show it to us so much.

But really, what is Alec Baldwin's level of fame these days? I'd be willing to bet that most people under 30 only know him from 30 Rock, the credit card commercials, and mostly just being that clueless angry dude in the celebrity-gossip news.
posted by Strange Interlude at 7:29 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

"i think he's spent so much time inside a certain bubble that he really doesn't know what normal folks find offensive."

This may be the funniest single thing I have ever read on Metafilter. It's like a mobius joke!
posted by umberto at 7:32 AM on February 24, 2014 [20 favorites]

In the New Media culture, anything good you do is tossed in a pit, and you are measured by who you are on your worst day.

Truth.
posted by Pirate-Bartender-Zombie-Monkey at 7:33 AM on February 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

Hey, cut the guy some slack! We all know how tough it is to be a rich white male in western society!
posted by blue_beetle at 7:35 AM on February 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

the baldwins are very famous and alec is the most famous of the bunch. 30 rock was a huge show. snl gets great ratings when he's on. his level of fame has not dwindled even if he's a long way from his wall street days.
posted by nadawi at 7:35 AM on February 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

Wall Street was michael douglas.
posted by lodurr at 7:39 AM on February 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

It's like a mobius joke!

I apologize for any implication that we might be normal folks. That was not my intent.
posted by lodurr at 7:40 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

It's just SO UNFAIR for people to judge him for shooting off his mouth and saying offensive things; why can't everyone just ignore that stuff and focus on the things that make him look good?

Good gods. What a shame. What a self-important boor, railing on about how persecuted he is, unable to resist getting another dig in while he drips with contempt for anyone who dared to criticize him. Everything's wrong now, and it's all someone else's fault. The very culture of New York hath turned against him and now sickens his blood. Lo, isn't he such a martyr! Shan't we just beg him to stay? Don't We Know Who He Is?!

Is he trying to audition for Richard III, here?
posted by desuetude at 7:42 AM on February 24, 2014 [6 favorites]

I think that saying "He's not homophobic, he's just behind the times and clueless" kind of misses the point. While using gay slurs repeatedly may not have been a big deal like 20 years ago, it's totally a big deal now.

That's not the way he's behind the times. "tranny" was an ordinary everyday word within the trans/gay community until quite recently. Like drag queen or queer, it was considered a friendly slang word as long as you were talking to decent folk. Growing up in NYC among gay people all my life it took me a while to unlearn it too. If he's been working in theatre in NY, that's who he's always known.

Now that the gay community has extended into living rooms in the midwest, it's become more polite too, and the rules are stricter. It's just a different environment now, and he hasn't caught on.
posted by mdn at 7:43 AM on February 24, 2014 [13 favorites]

I did read (well skim towards the end) the entire piece and mostly I'm left with the impression of an enormous ego, flailing at losing the respect he thinks he's due. Ya know, New Yorkers used to come up to him and stroke his ego politely, but now everyone is so mean!

He does seem thoughtful about some things, along with being intemperate, judgmental, and full of hubris.
posted by Squeak Attack at 7:44 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

Wall Street was michael douglas.

aw shit- i knew i should have googled that. glengarry glen ross, obviously.
posted by nadawi at 7:45 AM on February 24, 2014

30 rock was a huge show. snl gets great ratings when he's on. his level of fame has not dwindled even if he's a long way from his wall street glengarry glen ross days.

30 Rock was not, by any stretch of the imagination, a huge show; his appearances on SNL are middle-of-the-road, he hasn't headlined a wide-release movie in four years, and he was third-billed in Glengarry Glen Ross. Sorry, but Alec Baldwin is B-list at best (and how much of that is because of his famously prickly demeanor, on- and off-set, is an exercise for the reader).
posted by Etrigan at 7:47 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

I get the impression from the comments here that a lot folks read this as:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit, sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat. Ut wisi enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exerci tation ullamcorper suscipit lobortis nisl ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis autem vel eum iriure dolor in hendrerit in vulputate velit esse molestie consequat, vel illum dolore eu feugiat nulla facilisis at vero eros et accumsan et iusto odio dignissim qui blandit praesent luptatum zzril delenit augue duis dolore te feugait nulla facilisi. Nam liber tempor cum soluta nobis eleifend option congue nihil imperdiet doming id quod mazim placerat facer possim assum. Typi non habent claritatem insitam; est usus legentis in iis qui facit eorum claritatem. Investigationes demonstraverunt lectores legere me lius quod ii legunt saepius. Claritas est etiam processus dynamicus, qui sequitur mutationem consuetudium lectorum. Mirum est notare quam littera gothica, quam nunc putamus parum claram, anteposuerit litterarum formas humanitatis per seacula quarta decima et quinta decima. Eodem modo typi, qui nunc nobis videntur parum clari, fiant sollemnes in futurum. TRANNY TRANNY TRANNY TRANNY TRANNY TRANNY TRANNY TRANNY TRANNY.... TRANNY TRANNY TRANNY QUEEN! TRANNY TRANNY TRANNY ANDERSON COOPER TRANNY TRANNY TRANNY.

1) Whoa. Not cool.

2) Look, I'm trying hard not to do the false equivalence thing, but there are plenty of other slurs that would absolutely torpedo the public credibility of any apology that contained them. The T-word is admittedly not at that level yet with the general public — but mainly because, outside the trans community, there's little recognition that it is a slur. People on this site are mostly ahead of the curve on this, and I think that's to their credit.
posted by this is a thing at 7:48 AM on February 24, 2014 [16 favorites]

Dear Alec Baldwin,

How can we miss you if you won't leave?

Sincerely,
The World

I heard a radio host talking about this and they were wondering if maybe he's in the early stages of a medical condition like dementia. Not that that would be an excuse but at least it would make some sense.
posted by fuse theorem at 7:50 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

I heard a radio host talking about this and they were wondering if maybe he's in the early stages of a medical condition like dementia.

Yeah, speculating that someone you disapprove of has brain damage is a useful addition to any conversation. And I say that as someone who has thought Baldwin was a jackass for some time now.
posted by aught at 7:52 AM on February 24, 2014 [13 favorites]

lol at your link for 30 rock - 7 seasons, in syndication, highly profitable for its stars, and shown in 20+ countries is small potatoes, i guess.

i mean we could argue all day about his level of fame - forbes ranks him pretty high.
posted by nadawi at 7:53 AM on February 24, 2014

How is inferring that he has dementia any less demeaning than his use of the word tranny? Seriously, how ridiculous.
posted by h00py at 7:55 AM on February 24, 2014

How is inferring that he has dementia any less demeaning than his use of the word tranny?

Stooping to the level of one's opponents while still calling them demeaning doesn't really say what you want it to say.
posted by Etrigan at 7:56 AM on February 24, 2014 [5 favorites]

he doesn't have dementia unless it's afflicted him for decades. this isn't new or different from him.
posted by nadawi at 7:59 AM on February 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

Much as I love the Blue, putting a post like this up is like lighting a smoke bomb in a movie theatre, if the smoke was guaranteed self-righteous outrage
posted by C.A.S. at 8:04 AM on February 24, 2014 [16 favorites]

he was third-billed in Glengarry Glen Ross

He was in one scene at the top of the film in a part written for him. Every other character had more screen time than him and he still got third billing!
posted by Green With You at 8:04 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

> It's lame to respond to a piece that was published for public consumption?

Not so much lame, but as part of the feedback cycle that feeds theglamour of celebrities and the associated dark turns that press coverage has taken, not so good. Sure, it's completely natural to talk about various personalities and what occurs in public. Everyone likes to chat and Metafilter one of the many office water cooler of the internet. But to what purpose in this instance, as a celebrity shines the spotlight on themselves to say they're stepping out of it?

Lord knows Alec Baldwin has done some wrong shit, even in the article he's written. But ultimately we only see snapshots of these people, both literally and figuratively and the impression we have of him (and all celebrities) is skewed. We can judge, but how accurately? Far better, IMO, to give him the privacy he seems to crave at this point and move on to some other juicy tidbit.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:09 AM on February 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

C.A.S.: "Much as I love the Blue, putting a post like this up is like lighting a smoke bomb in a movie theatre, if the smoke was guaranteed self-righteous outrage"

It's OK because it's blue smoke.
posted by chavenet at 8:10 AM on February 24, 2014

Bark! Bark bark! ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR - woof! *paper shredding noises*
posted by Lipstick Thespian at 8:11 AM on February 24, 2014

One good thing about Alec Baldwin is that he's not Stephen Baldwin.
posted by mcstayinskool at 8:16 AM on February 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

Not knowning too much about Baldwin, or caring either, this was an interesting read seemingly mischaracterised in the thread here. The way he used "tranny" was clueless more than offensive and it seems he does have some problems realising that and why certain insults like cocksucker are homophobic even if you don't use the word faggot. Whether that's a celebrity problem or an old white dude problem is irrelevant.

It's abundantly clear he needs to control his language, his temper better, but I wouldn't want to judge him too harshly as after all every shitty thing he does or says is blown up and possibly twisted to fit into the media narrative about him. I can't imagine what that most be like and he gets some sympathy from me because of it, even though he's still a clueless idiot at best.

In any case, in a choice between Alec Baldwin and Andrew "hey remember that time I said all liberals are traitors?" Sullivan, I'll take Baldwin in a heart beat.
posted by MartinWisse at 8:17 AM on February 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

bukvich: " Why do PR guys (don't tell me this wasn't ghosted) do this shit?"

I'm a PR guy. This was not written by a PR guy. A PR guy (or woman) wouldn't have phrased an apology this way, nor bashed Shia LaBeouf in such a public manner, nor written anything this angry and bitter and long, and (I would like to think) would have discarded the phrases "Tranny" "Queen" "Cocksucker" and anything else that smacked of homophobia or could offend large groups of readers.
posted by zarq at 8:20 AM on February 24, 2014 [14 favorites]

Everybody who's going on and on about the bad words he used without actually talking about the point of the piece (no doubt because you didn't bother to actually read it): You're the problem. You're the reason that TMZ and all these other mosquitoes exist. Your desperation to pull down anyone in the public eye, to feel "Hey, I'm totally better than this rich guy!", is one of the biggest reasons that our popular culture is so shallow and fucked-up. You are what this article is about, and it is a little sad that you took the bait so eagerly.

Also, arguing that Alec Baldwin isn't A-list is just flagrantly ignoring reality. I also don't particularly love the guy, but saying things that are obviously and objectively false just doesn't help your cause.
posted by IAmUnaware at 8:21 AM on February 24, 2014 [22 favorites]

>

Somebody needs to fix the carousel on Stephen's home page -- it's continuing to slide-over to the Stephen Baldwin CEO of Stephen Baldwin Enterprises hero-shot even after I start playing the video.
posted by lodurr at 8:22 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

IAmUnaware: "You are what this article is about, and it is a little sad that you took the bait so eagerly."

Yeah, heaven forbid people who are actually demeaned and disparaged by the terms he used speak up for themselves.
posted by zarq at 8:22 AM on February 24, 2014 [17 favorites]

it's not just his language, it's the way he repeatedly uses it, loses it, apologizes in this "it's all their fault" sort of way, and moves on to the next time. i think paparazzi culture is awful. i think the things kristen bell & dax shepard are fighting for are important. i think that over decades alex baldwin has shown himself to be a hate-filled blowhard who thinks the money he's donated and parties he's gone to absolves him from his temper.
posted by nadawi at 8:25 AM on February 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

Everybody who's going on and on about the bad words he used without actually talking about the point of the piece (no doubt because you didn't bother to actually read it): You're the problem. You're the reason that TMZ and all these other mosquitoes exist. Your desperation to pull down anyone in the public eye, to feel "Hey, I'm totally better than this rich guy!", is one of the biggest reasons that our popular culture is so shallow and fucked-up. You are what this article is about, and it is a little sad that you took the bait so eagerly.

Also, arguing that Alec Baldwin isn't A-list is just flagrantly ignoring reality. I also don't particularly love the guy, but saying things that are obviously and objectively false just doesn't help your cause.

... Alec?
posted by ominous_paws at 8:30 AM on February 24, 2014 [5 favorites]

I find the whole situation sad. He makes numerous points about the "piling on" mentality that ruins civic discourse (and fuels paparazzi paychecks) and I didn't expect to see an example of that here.
posted by cleroy at 8:30 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

> Although yeah, you'd think the ghost writer or editors would have caught [the slurs]

I can imagine them happily leaving them in in a "give him enough rope" move.
posted by The corpse in the library at 8:32 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

30 Rock was not, by any stretch of the imagination, a huge show

112 Emmy Nominations, 16 wins. Total 145 award nominations, 39 wins. Very high affluence ratings -- tied for #11. Huge critical success.

I'm sorry, just because you dislike Alec Baldwin doesn't make 30 Rock anything less than what it is, a hugely influential and critically acclaimed series that consistently sold high dollar ads *despite* modest ratings. It is clearly a Huge Show, and if it wasn't, nobody would still be talking about it.
posted by eriko at 8:33 AM on February 24, 2014 [17 favorites]

How is inferring that he has dementia any less demeaning than his use of the word tranny?

Well, let me display my own cluelessness. I get the point about non-medical professionals inflicting largely baseless medical diagnoses from a distance. However, I don't get how "dementia" is supposedly as insulting as "tranny". One is an actual medical condition and the other is a slur.

Whatever, the person who made the comment was being sarcastic in that calculated way radio hosts who have a lot of time to fill tend to do. They also know Baldwin socially.

he doesn't have dementia unless it's afflicted him for decades. this isn't new or different from him.

He must have been keeping it better hidden from general public view.
posted by fuse theorem at 8:34 AM on February 24, 2014

Also, arguing that Alec Baldwin isn't A-list is just flagrantly ignoring reality. I also don't particularly love the guy, but saying things that are obviously and objectively false just doesn't help your cause.

Please, show me this objective list of A-list stars that ignores the fact that he couldn't get his show renewed despite telling the fourth-ranked network that he would take a pay cut to do it.
posted by Etrigan at 8:35 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

He must have been keeping it better hidden from general public view.

he really wasn't. search for his diatribes about parental alienation. his brother stephen has also had similar temper issues on tape. this is a longstanding personality trait of his, not a change. it's the reason he has the reputation as a hot head with a temper.
posted by nadawi at 8:37 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

Everybody who's going on and on about the bad words he used without actually talking about the point of the piece (no doubt because you didn't bother to actually read it): You're the problem.

Fuck this. I read the whole piece. Baldwin clearly feels (and at least occasionally *is*) misunderstood, and feels (and is!) under a kind of microscopic attention that the unfamous of us can mostly avoid. He doesn't have the luxury, and if he doesn't know that by now, I don't know what to tell him. Other Famous People have made gaffes and done stupid shit and have managed to carry on without having the kind of repeated public tantrums that Baldwin seems to favor.

He is not helping himself here. In case it was unclear in what I wrote above, him using the term "tranny" is symptomatic of a thing that has gotten him a lot of attention of a kind he doesn't like: he lacks a kind of awareness, at least sometimes. There are ways he can help fix this, or at least to not make it worse.
posted by rtha at 8:38 AM on February 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

mdn: "Now that the gay community has extended into living rooms in the midwest, it's become more polite too, and the rules are stricter. It's just a different environment now, and he hasn't caught on."

If all he did was use the term "tranny" too casually in print, he wouldn't be getting this level of vitriol. Though I thought his depiction of meeting with that group in Hawaii was pretty crass overall, actually. But the thing that he hasn't caught onto is that he's accused of homophobic because he keeps saying homophobic things. Not because the gay media is "after him."

being labeled a homophobic bigot by Andrew Sullivan, Anderson Cooper, and others in the Gay Department of Justice.

a TMZ videographer ambushed me as I was putting my family in a car, and I chased him down the block and said, “Cocksucking motherfucker” or whatever (when I have some volatile interaction with these people, I don’t pull out a pen and take notes on what I said)

I ended up attacking a reporter who wrote in the Daily Mail online that my wife was tweeting from Jimmy’s funeral. [...] In my rage, however, I called him a “toxic little queen,” and, thus, Anderson Cooper, the self-appointed Jack Valenti of gay media culture, suggested I should be “vilified"

In the recent video, you see me completely riled up and going after this guy and you hear me saying “cocksucker” and then some bisyllabic word that sounds like “faggot”—but wasn’t. Still, it doesn’t matter. glaad comes after me and Anderson Cooper comes after me and Andrew Sullivan comes after me, all maintaining that I’m a hateful homophobe. All based on what Harvey Levin told them.

No, Alec, not based on what Harvey Levin told them. Based on what you were heard to say.

Oh, gee, all he did was call one reporter a cocksucking motherfucker and another a toxic little queen, but he's shocked, shocked that anyone could possibly believe that he yelled "faggot" as well? Why didn't people understand that whatever he yelled that sounded like faggot was actually some other similar-sounding word that was definitely not faggot?
posted by desuetude at 8:40 AM on February 24, 2014 [12 favorites]

Why exactly does it matter if Baldwin isn't "A-list"?

And WTF does "A-list" mean, anyway? The last industry-accepted definition I heard was "can get project done on strength of their name." And just about by definition, anyone who's had a publicity disaster is therefore not "A-list."

So it's kind of a stupid term to use in this discussion. Baldwin was clearly "A-list" for values of the types of projects he was interested in, at about this time last year. He's clearly not now. The change in status is certainly relevant. Mocking him for not currently being "A-list", however, smacks of schoolyard taunting.
posted by lodurr at 8:40 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

he would take a pay cut to do it.

according to him. maybe tina fey was done. he also publicly threatened to quit 30 rock many times. lots of a-listers manage to burn bridges they're standing on.
posted by nadawi at 8:43 AM on February 24, 2014

the corpse in the library: I can imagine them happily leaving them in in a "give him enough rope" move.

Professionalism doesn't usually work that way.

However, I can imagine a PR writer being engaged, offering his rewrite and professional opinion, being ignored, and cashing the check for the billable hours. And they'd be totally right to do so.
posted by lodurr at 8:44 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

maybe tina fey was done

I thought that was the public story, with the general sentiment being "thank god yes please go make more movies or write more books because this is starting to get maudlin."
posted by lodurr at 8:46 AM on February 24, 2014

Was a PR writer engaged? It's bylined with "as told to..." a guy who write fro NY mag, among others. Would it additionally have been gone over by a PR person hired by Baldwin?
posted by rtha at 8:46 AM on February 24, 2014

But that's what he's saying now. Fuck it, I'm out of here, he's saying. He can't win, regardless of what he says or how he says it. He's just trying to justify why he's saying that now. I really hope he can back the fuck away from the media like many of his cohorts have. It's possible, obviously, but when you've been targeted by the media it seems to be incredibly difficult. No more words, Alec.
posted by h00py at 8:47 AM on February 24, 2014

no, we were just speculating. someone remarked that it sounded to them like PR spin; a PR pro commented that it didn't look like competent PR work (consistent w/ my experience working w/ PR folks, BTW); etc.
posted by lodurr at 8:48 AM on February 24, 2014

I really hope that this guy can find a discrete and private anger management treatment option now that he's publicly retired from public life.
posted by oceanjesse at 8:48 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

Mocking him for not currently being "A-list", however, smacks of schoolyard taunting.

I hope I'm not coming off as mocking him -- that was not my intent. I just don't think that he's the huge megastar that a few people seem committed to making him out to be. Nor do I think that he wants to be that huge megastar and hasn't for a long time, and I think that a lot of the reason why is that he knows he can't handle that for long, so he's okay with being a solid B-lister who can mostly make the projects that he wants to without having to support a pocket industry the way a Tom Cruise or a Will Smith has to.
posted by Etrigan at 8:50 AM on February 24, 2014

I enjoyed reading that…it's nice to hear some seriously un-varnished opinions on people like whats-his-name who runs MSNBC…it explains a lot. And Harvey Levin/TMZ. There is a lot not to like there, so I can sympathize.
posted by littlejohnnyjewel at 8:59 AM on February 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

It just struck me that Alec Baldwin may simply be picking up William Shatner's mantle as that 'that egotistical jerk who's just self-aware enough to capitalize on his reputation for being an egostistical jerk'.
posted by lodurr at 9:01 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

But Shatner was never really hateful was he? Baldwin's problem is that whatever considered opinions he may have get lost in his very very poor choice of words and his obvious need to act out his rage in a tantrum.
posted by OHenryPacey at 9:03 AM on February 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

No, aside from some personal things he's reported second-hand to have said about Takei. But he's always been quite publicly smooth, for the most part. Aside from the monstrous oxygen-depleting ego, that is.
posted by lodurr at 9:04 AM on February 24, 2014

When you get past Baldwin's defensiveness and possibly a bit of narcissism, he's basically saying that living a life as a public figure in the modern era sucks and is insane. I agree, honestly. I'd be afraid to leave my house.

It sounds like his biggest problems are being a blowhard with anger issues and a tendency to use homophobic slurs as insults in the heat of the moment. Is that good? No, not at all. Do I care much? No, not really. If I were making a list of "the most homophobic celebrities" for some reason, he'd probably show up in 139th place or something if I bothered to put him on at all. Yeah, I'd rather he wasn't on video using terms for homosexuality as slurs. But yeah, he's got a point that if that weren't public, it'd be an issue for himself and his therapist, and it wouldn't be public if he weren't being followed 24/7 by predatory maggots.

I don't know him, he's never punched a friend of mine, and it sounds like he doesn't even vote for people who want to make me a second class citizen. Alec Baldwin's personality does not affect me enough for me to dislike it.
posted by kyrademon at 9:07 AM on February 24, 2014 [20 favorites]

This is seriously going to interfere with my enjoyment of future viewings of The Shadow (1994).

I'm probably one of like five people who can say that completely seriously.
posted by gurple at 9:09 AM on February 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

rtha: "Would it additionally have been gone over by a PR person hired by Baldwin?"

Smart publicists do their best to keep their clients on a short leash. They educate them thoroughly about protecting their image as well as how very ephemeral positive public opinion can be. With anyone in the public eye, and especially actors it's not always possible to control everything that happens.

But this is a multipage essay printed in a magazine. Baldwin's repped by Hiltzik Strategies. They should have vetted and edited this piece for him.
posted by zarq at 9:11 AM on February 24, 2014

Ha ha.

Oh man.

"I didn't call him a faggot! I just called him a cocksucking motherfucker!"

Best defense ever.

It’s good-bye to public life in the way that you try to communicate with an audience playfully like we’re friends, beyond the work you are actually paid for.

Obviously it's our fault for taking him seriously when he flies into uncontrollable rages where he says things that he thinks we shouldn't take seriously. I despise TMZ, but paparazzi are not a new phenomenon and there are plenty of resources to help millionaire celebrities deal with them. There has always been a social contract between studios/actors and the press. At times a more explicit contract than others. Studios want publicity for their movies, actors want a paycheck, but they've never wanted the public scrutiny that has always followed. They want us to believe that Baldwin et al is our collective best friend (as Baldwin notes), but a best friend beyond knowing or any reproach. It's weird that it's taken Baldwin decades to realize that this is true. I figured it out when I was teenager watching MTV and I'm not even a celebrity.
posted by muddgirl at 9:11 AM on February 24, 2014

I get the impression from the comments here that a lot folks read this as:

You know, delayed reaction and all here and I get the substance of your argument in that comment, but it's actually pretty crappy to be like "you all seem to just be hearing [latin latin latin SLUR SLUR SLUR SLUR SLUR SLUR SLUR] and missing the point", just throwing that into a thread as a point-making gesture. If I'd had some caffeine in me when that comment went up in the first place I'd have nixed it and told you to try again without repeatedly boldface-allcapsing a known-crappy word for effect.
posted by cortex at 9:11 AM on February 24, 2014 [15 favorites]

> Professionalism doesn't usually work that way

I was thinking of a particular editor when I wrote that, who'd said exactly that about a writer who'd pitched a piece to the magazine I was working at. It would have made the writer sound a bit racist, and also would have been an interesting article.
posted by The corpse in the library at 9:14 AM on February 24, 2014

when it came to the sequel, "patriot Games".

Holy shit how did I not know that these movies were related?

Generally I don't understand peoples' fascination with actors' personal lives. Alec Baldwin appears to be kind of an asshole but he is decent at acting -- even if these days it's sort of the "gruff smarmy old guy" role over and over. Lucky for him there's a place for that. Here he comes off old and out of touch, like my Granny when she was confused why all the kids would wince whgen she used the word "darky".

But when it comes to TMZ and paparazzi and people blocking your way and getting in your face, I'm all for aggression because if I'm honest I would be pretty fucking aggressive with that sort of behavior too. Thankfully though, my own default "angry" setting doesn't involve homophobic slurs.
posted by Hoopo at 9:15 AM on February 24, 2014

"I didn't expect to see an example of that here."

You must be new here.
posted by The Blue Olly at 9:31 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

Am I the only one who noted the irony of the conversations Baldwin had with the head of MSNBC, and how they mirrored his 30 Rock character's . I kept waiting for him to acknowledge the irony and he didn't, which did make me think, even more so than I already did, that he lacked perspective and the insight it allows.

I, in general, like Alec Baldwin's work, but I don't care about his politics because famous people, no matter how they became famous, will never make the world a better place. I, too, am sick of celebrity culture and the increasingly difficult time one has of avoiding it. It's kind of fascinating sociologically but a drag otherwise. Forward to the Pleistocene!
posted by kidkilowatt at 9:31 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

Look At Me! Look At Me! Stop Looking At Me! Look At Me! Look At Meeeeeeee!

Baldwin has made so many offensive statements; why didn't he get dumped from (more)shows and commercials and shunned, like Paula Deen?
posted by theora55 at 9:33 AM on February 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

To me Alec Baldwin is a little like Kanye West with more privilege and a bigger anger and sensitivity problem. Quite a bit of what he says and does gets him in trouble, often with good reason. But if you can get past that, he does have intelligent things to say about modern society and culture.

Knowing that paparazzi ask you abusive and insulting questions to get a rise out of you if you are someone known to have a problem with anger, I wonder what it was like for Baldwin to walk around New York and get harangued with insults for an hour or two, added up, every day. I don't have a problem with anger, and yet I expect that would take its toll on me.

graymouser: A friend who is a reporter in central NJ wrote about his encounter with Baldwin a couple years back. TLDR: Baldwin shoved him and acted the arrogant, limousine liberal ass. (Literally with the limo part.)

For what it's worth, I think your friend is part of the problem. "Being a large guy, I used my body to block his path. His concerned entourage advanced on me and realized I wasn’t leaving until I got what I came for." Just because you're a blogger or a journalist, you don't get to block people off and stop them from leaving. Nobody owes you anything. Sorry if you made a trip out of your house on the off chance some celebrity would give you a comment, but if they don't want to then leave them alone.

Some of Baldwin's article really resonated with me, this in particular:

In the New Media culture, anything good you do is tossed in a pit, and you are measured by who you are on your worst day. What’s the Boy Scout code? Trustworthy. Loyal. Helpful. Friendly. Courteous. Kind. Obedient. Cheerful. Thrifty. Brave. Clean. Reverent. I might be all of those things, at certain moments. But people suspect that whatever good you do, you are faking. You’re that guy. You’re that guy that says this. . . .

Broadway has changed, by my lights. The TV networks, too. New York has changed. Even the U.S., which is so preposterously judgmental now. The heart, the arteries of the country are now clogged with hate. The fuel of American political life is hatred. Who would ever dream that Obama would deserve to be treated the way he has been? The birth-certificate bullshit, which is just Obama’s version of Swiftboating. And all for the electoral nullification that seems like a cancer on the American system. But this is Roger Ailes. And Fox. And Breitbart. And this is all about hate. It’s Hate Incorporated. But the liberals have taken the bait and run in the same direction—and it’s just as corrosive. MSNBC, in its own way, is as full of shit, as redundant and as superfluous, as Fox.

Yup. I mean, so there's a network out there combating FOX's pretty hate machine, but all things considered it would be better for everyone if neither of them existed. Sometimes I read the things people say about one another on the Internet (not even YouTube comments!) and I just don't understand where it all comes from.
posted by onlyconnect at 9:36 AM on February 24, 2014 [17 favorites]

I have no problem with him not having anything against gay people as such while still saying those things, much the same way I don't think Michael Richards is really a racist. I think sometimes you get angry at someone - and Baldwin seems like someone who a) has been pushed by paparazzi to a point that would break most anyone, and b) probably didn't need to be pushed all that far to begin with.

And when you get angry at someone you lash out. You want to get to them, push their buttons. And God knows America's buttons aren't hard to find. They're right out there on the front panel with backlit labels and blinking LEDs. I swear we have to be the most passive aggressive culture in human history.

So I don't think Baldwin's homophobic or bigoted, but it's not like he hasn't been around the block enough times to know what happens when you react that way to provocation. And he should probably understand that people tend not to react well to long lists of assholes that are the reason for everything that's gone wrong in your life. Just as I don't think Baldwin's really a bigot, I don't think Rachel Maddow and Anderson Cooper sit around in secret meetings plotting how to get the bastard. (Wasn't there a 30 Rock gag about this with a secret cabal of black leaders trying to ruin Tracy Jordan?)
posted by Naberius at 9:39 AM on February 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

I actually really enjoyed his WNYC podcast/radio show. Alec Baldwin's situation is just so sad to me as he clearly does have things to contribute.
posted by Jahaza at 9:58 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

I'm willing to give Alec Baldwin a pass on specifically being anti-gay or transphobic. He's just an asshole. He says as much in his piece, "I called him a cocksucker, not a faggot!". I don't know if he's self-aware enough to realize how hilarious that is, but basically it's him embracing that he's an asshole. He was an asshole to that flight attendent, too. He's an equal opportunity asshole. And he's smart to keep that in private.

Problem is being private won't let him feed off the cult of celebrity he's enjoyed for the past ten years, which is too bad. Maybe he'll buckle down and do what he's good at, acting, he's a hell of a good actor when he tries.
posted by Nelson at 9:59 AM on February 24, 2014

I read half of this thread with Adam Baldwin in mind, and was surprised that he was even trying. Now I'm disappointed that he's not disappearing from public life.
posted by dinty_moore at 10:11 AM on February 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

And when you get angry at someone you lash out. You want to get to them, push their buttons.

pretty much the same defense he used when he lashed out at his 11 year old (except for a long time he blamed basinger, not levine for that one - interesting how who to blame changes depending on his spin). his list of people who deserve a righteously angry tongue lashing is far longer than just the paparazzi.
posted by nadawi at 10:12 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

Personally, I'm just happy I'm not a celebrity. When I'm properly furious at someone (mercifully rare these days), I have almost zero control over what comes out of my mouth. The Finnish equivalent of "fucking faggot" is one clear frontrunner, and I don't have a homophobic cell in my body, nor am I a jerk to people in general. Lashing out at someone doesn't come from a rational place. The language I use in those situations now, as a 30+ feminist man, is the very same language I would have used in enraged confrontations with assholes when I was 13. It's automatic, instinctive, like it's programmed into my lizard brain. The only difference is that now I instantly regret having said those things because I know better, yet I know that I'll do the same thing again because I can't fucking help it.

I know nothing about Alec Baldwin or any media shitstorm surrounding him; I read the article and it didn't seem that egregious despite his cluelessness about slurs, but I admit I lack context. Still, count me in the camp of people who don't think he actually hates or even dislikes LGBT people based on the evidence at hand.

It seems Stephen Fry tweeted about the article.
posted by jklaiho at 10:12 AM on February 24, 2014 [6 favorites]

I think there was a very good reason why David Mamet wrote the intro scene for Glengary Glen Ross specifically for Alec; he truly does have balls of brass. And they often get him in trouble.

I really like Alec Baldwin. He's an enormously entertaining human being. He's a natural comedian, a superlative actor, and he tries, really seems to try to be honest about himself. And it only gets him in more hot water. Because like all of us, he sometimes can't see his own errors, because, you know, he's human.

He's passionate about politics, and I agree with almost all of his politics. Yeah, he can be a dick. He's got an ego, but given the breadth of his career, it would be almost magical thinking to believe he could have produced all those great performances without one.

I think he was truly, truly in love with Kim Basinger, and I think the dissolution of that relationship threw him for a loop that even his ego couldn't account for. I think it impacted his relationship with his daughter, and I think he regrets what he did to her with that phone bullshit more than you and I can ever know.

I've done shitty things in my life. Thank god TMZ doesn't have them on tape.

I appreciated Alec taking the time to present his side of the story, as well as the glimpses he gave us of MSNBC, HuffPo, etc., etc. I think it's a little disingenuous to blame Alec for some words that he has used while defending himself against attacks against himself and his family from an industry that has everything to gain from pissing him off.

I suspect Alec has grown up in an industry where cursing like a sailor is looked upon as a rare gift, and unfortunately, he's not as good at swearing as he thinks he is. If only he had used terms like "Magnificent Bastard" or "Sons A Bitches" instead of "Cocksucker." But I also suspect that soon enough, even those terms will be politically charged. Maybe they already are. I have no idea. I sincerely doubt that the word cocksucker has anything to do with homosexuals in Alec's brain when he uses it as an expletive. It certainly doesn't in mine.

Anyway, I like Alec Baldwin. And I enjoyed this article. Thank you for posting it.
posted by valkane at 10:14 AM on February 24, 2014 [9 favorites]

About the "tranny" thing; I’m not sure what’s going on here. It’s not a word I’ve ever used because it sounds vaguely dismissive, but I don’t really understand what’s so terribly offensive. Like "Jap" (another word I have never used for the same reason) it seems to be a short version of something, not an insult. But I know people who act like "Mexican" is an insult when speaking about people from Mexico. Makes me wonder about them and their real opinions.

I’m for equal rights and respect for everyone and have no bias in this regard. I will gladly vote to make this happen. But the thing is, It’s not a big enough part of my life to research what terms are insulting today and weren’t yesterday and the reasons behind it. If discussing and becoming involved in this issue (or any other) means that I’m going to be berated for not using the correct terminology it’s simply much easier for me to ignore the whole thing and not participate. That’s my privilege, and that’s the part that seems to often forgotten.

He says in the rant that wanted to learn something about how he should change his behavior (and apparently he got the impression that that word was OK, right or wrong) but the response is mostly "you used the wrong word, you’re a bad person and everything else is hill and void". So he’s saying "fuck it, I’ll just move on". I don’t think he can really do that because the spotlight is part of his job, but most of us can. That’s what privilege is, the ability to disengage, not something that can be used as weak point to attack someone with to try and cause guilt.

If you want people to make changes in society you ask them to support, or at least tolerate, the changes. If you ask them to research, follow the latest thinking and trends, and be careful not to step outside the lines or suffer an attack on their character, then most people are going to choose not to engage at all, and some will just become defensive and contrary when they would have had no objection otherwise.
posted by bongo_x at 10:22 AM on February 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

Personally I never say "son of a bitch" (or "bitch" a pejorative, for that matter), because of what it implies about women. I tend to be less worried about offending male donkeys than people.
posted by lodurr at 10:23 AM on February 24, 2014

bongo_x, this might help you a little bit.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:24 AM on February 24, 2014

I wish I could remember where, but I was reading a discussion of "tranny" as slang a week or so ago -- maybe prompted by this, I don't know. Anyway, the upshot was that of several transexuals participating in the discussion, they couldn't agree on whether it was generically offensive -- but all pretty much agreed that it was pretty problematic when it came from a straight cisgender person.
posted by lodurr at 10:25 AM on February 24, 2014

The idea that tranny is offensive is relatively new and not commonly understood, even in the gay community. I think Metafilter is ahead of the curve on this one. It was all news to me about a year ago and I'm still a bit confused about why, but the transgendered people I know don't like tranny and I'm not an asshole so I take their word for it. The problem with Baldwin is he deliberately uses tranny not one paragraph before saying "I want to learn about what is hurtful speech." Either he's trolling, clueless, or maybe the people in Hawai'i didn't tell him it was offensive.

cocksucker is pretty much equivalent to faggot in my mind as specifically an anti-gay slur. It may describe a pansexual activity but it's pretty much only used as an epithet against men, the insult being that somehow a man sucking cock is a bad thing. That's why I think Baldwin's defense in this essay is hilarious. I think he's just clueless, but again I'm not sure if maybe he's trolling. Either way it contributes to his larger rhetorical point, which is "Alec Baldwin is an asshole".
posted by Nelson at 10:36 AM on February 24, 2014

Guys, I know some of you mean well, but it'd be cool if maybe people are a little more careful about repeating slurs in-thread unless it's part of a direct quote and certainly don't all caps a string of nothing but. It's very uncomfortable. For future reference.
posted by byanyothername at 10:38 AM on February 24, 2014 [6 favorites]

jap is a slur because it came to prominence in propaganda designed to make us feel better about bombing japan and locking japanese americans up in internment camps.
posted by nadawi at 10:38 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

It was all news to me about a year ago and I'm still a bit confused about why

And just to answer this real quick, it's what we get called by people who assault, abuse and murder us (or at least perpetuate a culture that encourages those things). It's not what we call ourselves. It's pretty triggering to hear/read at all.
posted by byanyothername at 10:40 AM on February 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

Personally, I'm just happy I'm not a celebrity. When I'm properly furious at someone (mercifully rare these days), I have almost zero control over what comes out of my mouth

Quoted because I think this is exactly the problem with Baldwin. It isn't that he is a minor B list actor -- he is an excellent actor, who drew the very best movie parts when he was young and beautiful, then revealed a huge talent for comedy in 3rd Rock. He's a committed and thoughtful liberal, too, who has long had political ambitions of his own.

But he has an anger problem which is huge. And it isn't just that he loses his temper and says dreadful things, it is that he stays angry, keeps stroking his anger like a beloved cat, and continues to spew poison. He doesn't seem to really be able to understand how it is to be the other person (wife, daughter, colleague, total stranger like Maddow) and be the recipient of this sort of bile. I think his anger is like a possessing demon -- it occupies far too much of him. That's what I got from reading this screed . . . an anger problem that looks to outsiders like a giant tumor on his soul.

I hope he does step away from private life and confront his anger. It is eating him alive, and it is poisoning the air for a lot of people who don't need any more of that. Including everyone LGBTQ, his family, and everyone else who has, even in his imagination, crossed Baldwin.
posted by bearwife at 10:41 AM on February 24, 2014 [7 favorites]

For future reference.

Understood, and I apologize.
posted by valkane at 10:41 AM on February 24, 2014

Yeah, I'm learning, roomthreeseventeen's link is helpful too. My real point is when people tell you a word offends them you're an asshole to keep using it around them, whether you understand or agree with it being offensive or not. I think a lot of people don't understand that.
posted by Nelson at 10:42 AM on February 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

an interesting exercise that i think came up in a metatalk thread, when you're curious about how hurtful a slur is, do a google image search for the slur and then the more accepted term. as byanyothername notes, it's about who is using the words/what they mean by them/what contexts they exist in and it's pretty easy to see why members of a community find certain words hurtful.
posted by nadawi at 10:43 AM on February 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

The idea that tranny is offensive is relatively new and not commonly understood, even in the gay community.

May depend a lot on what gay community you are in (there are lots!); from my experience, it's really not a term that should be used in public unless you mean to be insulting, and if you don't mean to be insulting and someone tells you it's insulting, you go "Oh, sorry - didn't know! Thanks!"

As an in-group term, it may be okay to use it in certain contexts. I used to hang out with a bunch of gay guys who used "faggot" as a term of affection within that group, but being called that by someone not in that group was not okay.
posted by rtha at 10:47 AM on February 24, 2014

Even pretty seriously crude language can get divorced from its origins. My wife has an exercise she likes to do, where she asks a couple of questions:

What's the most insulting thing you can call an american man?

What's the most insulting thing you can call an american woman?

Without prompting, most people come up with two different terms for vaginas.

People don't think about this when they use the terms -- that basically you're saying the most insulting thing you can be called is a vagina. And for a lot of people they never really buy that it's important. But a lot of them do, and think more carefully about their language after that.

With the gay slurs, it's basically the same thing: we want to call you something really bad, so we use a word that would be descriptive of gay men or of actions we associate primarily with gay men.

Still, though, most people do not make the connection. Even when they're clever enough to get it, they fight it, feel like someone is trying to 'police their language.'
posted by lodurr at 10:56 AM on February 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

As I was trying to read through this late last night, the "tranny" word made me say "he's going to catch hell for that."

I then pondered if he might be an expert troll.
posted by dabitch at 11:09 AM on February 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

Man, now I feel like a dick for calling Baldwin an asshole.
posted by Nelson at 11:10 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

I'm willing to give Alec Baldwin a pass on specifically being anti-gay or transphobic. He's just an asshole.

I saw this and thought of a particular Lindy West quote:

And being an "equal opportunity offender"—as in, "It's okay, because Daniel Tosh makes fun of ALL people: women, men, AIDS victims, dead babies, gay guys, blah blah blah"—falls apart when you remember (as so many of us are forced to all the time) that all people are not in equal positions of power. "Oh, don't worry—I punch everyone in the face! People, baby ducks, a lion, this Easter Island statue, the ocean…" Okay, well that baby duck is dead now. And you're a duck-murderer.

She's talking about rape jokes in comedy routines, but the idea that someone is "just being an asshole" when they are being that kind of an asshole to people who are specifically percecuted and marginalized for belonging to certain groups (in this case, gender and sexual minorities) or being that kind of asshole in a way that gives a pass to people who persecute and marginalize those groups (because people look to one another for examples of behavior and people like Baldwin getting away with being a fucking jerk to the metaphorical baby ducks makes it seem okay to do the same thing) is just as applicable here as in the instances she's talking about.
posted by NoraReed at 11:12 AM on February 24, 2014 [23 favorites]

Man, now I feel like a dick for calling Baldwin an asshole.

And I feel like an elbow for calling him a penis.
posted by valkane at 11:18 AM on February 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

I've had to take aside one or two of my cis het male friends and ask them not to use that word, and in some cases they've cited the word's usage in the gay community as the reason they thought it was okay to use. So it's also possible that the group that Baldwin talked to didn't include any trans women to bring that word up, and it's possible it might not have occurred to the trans man. I'd like to think most LGBT organizations giving a sensitivity briefing to a celebrity would include something like this, but I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't. I'd also like to think that someone earnestly intending to improve in this area would find a way to get a more comprehensive education, but there's enough other stuff in the essay for me to be unsure how sincere he was with that whole endeavor anyway.

Also, I'd say at least in some gay circles there's not just misunderstanding, but an active resistance to trans people's objections. (Ru Paul is a good example - he's got a bigger megaphone than Laverne Cox or Janet Mock, so presumably more people hear him promoting the word than trans women's pleas not to use it.)
posted by Corinth at 11:24 AM on February 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

At first reading I had a bit of sympathy for him. As others have said there are clearly a few worthwhile nuggets in that screed. But desuetude's comment has convinced me that Baldwin quacks like a homophobe. All that stuff about "self-appointed Jack Valenti of gay media culture" and "Gay Department of Justice," reflects the type of worldview that bigots have, an idea that there's something inherently marginal about marginalized communities, whose issues can be dismissed by 'regular guys' as the special pleading and extortion of professional grievance hustlers.

So when Baldwin announces he "gives up," he's in part telegraphing to society at large that he's concluded its a waste of time trying to please teh gayz. He's leaving New York because there are just too many of them there. He doesn't really even want to stop using homophobic language. That's why in the midst of his apology/apologia his little dog whistle slurs are passive-aggressively littered throughout, undercutting his false goal of mending bridges; but reinforcing his true goal of giving the finger to anybody who dared hold him accountable for his words.
posted by xigxag at 11:32 AM on February 24, 2014 [10 favorites]

and in some cases they've cited the word's usage in the gay community as the reason they thought it was okay to use

But this excuse never flies. I don't get to use the N-word, even though black people do. And men don't get to call me a bitch or a cunt even if I use those words with my female friends.

And on top of that, one oppressed group doesn't get to decide what's offensive to anyone else. There's a lot of crossover between communities so it's obviously not that cut and dried, but cisgender gay people don't really get to decide how appropriate transgender or transsexual slurs are.
posted by muddgirl at 11:36 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

So when Baldwin announces he "gives up," he's in part telegraphing to society at large that he's concluded its a waste of time trying to please teh gayz.

Maybe. But I felt more like he's giving up because as long as they can point the label homophobe at him, they can stalk him all they want. And by "they" I mean the paparazzi.

At least that's what I understood when he addressed the L.A. gated community thingy and the "I would change the paparazzi laws" thingy.
posted by valkane at 11:37 AM on February 24, 2014

his complaints about being stalked by the paparazzi predates him yelling homophobic slurs in public. lots of great people are doing the heavy lifting of getting those laws changed. he's just enjoying the sound of his own voice, as usual.
posted by nadawi at 11:43 AM on February 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

cocksucker is pretty much equivalent to faggot in my mind as specifically an anti-gay slur. It may describe a pansexual activity but it's pretty much only used as an epithet against men, the insult being that somehow a man sucking cock is a bad thing.

I don't use the term as an insult myself, so I've got no particular stake in this, but it was always my impression "cocksucker" as an insult meant something akin to boot-licker or ass-kisser (ach! ass-kisser isn't viewed as homophobic and offensive now is it?). Not so much an attempt to malign someone's sexuality, per se, but to depict them as too eagerly submissive to powerful people.

Not defending "cocksucker" as an epithet, but I always thought the connotations were more like "lackey" or "boot-lick" or "toady" than anything to do with sexual orientation. I took the idea to be that "cocksuckers" are people willing to give pleasure submissively and indiscriminately to the powerful (who are almost always men, so I could see some implied patriarchy in that read on the word)...
posted by saulgoodman at 11:44 AM on February 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

it was always my impression "cocksucker" as an insult meant something akin to boot-licker or ass-kisser (ach! ass-kisser isn't viewed as homophobic and offensive now is it?). Not so much an attempt to malign someone's sexuality, per se, but to depict them as too eagerly submissive to powerful people.

It could certainly be used in that way, but when Baldwin slings it against a paparazzo, he's not trying to poke at their submission to power, he's just trying to insult them. If that's the worst thing he can think of, it's probably coming from a much more anti-gay position than an anti-obsequious one.
posted by Etrigan at 11:49 AM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

The amount of hand-wringing from certain corners about whether, deep down, he's a 'true' homophobe or transmisogynist is laughable. Handy tip: it doesn't matter. His actions do. He's used his international stage to disseminate language which serves solely to marginalise gay and trans people, to normalise and to reinforce the idea that we're fair game for mockery or worse, that we're outside of 'normal', that we're not worthy of basic respect.

Anyone whose voice is given prominence and who uses language like this actively helps position mockery and disrespect for marginalised people as normal. If you don't see that this is exactly where the atmosphere of casual bigotry which denies us engagement with society, dismantles our confidence and self-regard, makes us conveniently dehumanised targets for populist legislation and allows those who would fire us, evict us and assault us to act with minimal fear of consequence because it was only a tranny, only a faggot, then more fool you.

It's immaterial whether he has some sort of bigoted inner nature or just says bigoted things when's he's super baby mad. The consequences are the same. I only care that he be sufficiently motivated not to do it again, and ideally that his prominence is used to discourage others from doing the same things. Chasing these slurs out of the mainstream is a meaningful, substantial gain.

As for the supposed over-focus on the slurs and not on the rest of the piece? I'm on the internet. If rich white men bloviating about how hard their lives are suddenly becomes relevant, I think I might just be able to find some.

I do always appreciate seeing a good whine about self-righteousness, though. Marginalised people holding strong opinions and standing up to say yes, I am right and this person's behaviour is wrong? Can't have that, can we?
posted by emmtee at 11:52 AM on February 24, 2014 [15 favorites]

My real point is when people tell you a word offends them you're an asshole to keep using it around them, whether you understand or agree with it being offensive or not. I think a lot of people don't understand that.

I think that’s pretty easy to agree on. My issue is in public forums there is often little difference noted between what is obviously an insult, a careless statement, something that makes a particular person uncomfortable, and every other shade of grey.

People often use very polite language to denote their bias. In that case I’m not bothered by the specific words, I’m bothered by the intent, no matter how nice the words used. I think that is too often ignored. Getting people to stop using specific words is fine, but not nearly as important as getting them to change their attitude and thinking. I think that often the first goal is at odds with the second. It doesn’t do much good to correct someone’s speech if the only thing they take away is that you are an annoying language pendant.

Words that are meant to be specifically insulting and have no other meaning are one thing, and are easy to to spot, but you don’t change the intent of an insult by changing the specific word used. If someone says they won’t go to a specific part of town because there are too many "people of color" there I don’t think they are enlightened. The Hill-Meyer article takes offense with the statements being made, I don’t really see how that would be any better with a different word being used, except that it would eventually denigrate that word as well, and it seems that there are often other words used in those same situations that carry the same meaning.

As I said, I have never used the word because it seems dismissive and far too cutesy, but I don’t hear it and immediately think "bigot". I might get the impression that that person is uncomfortable or unfamiliar, but that’s not the same as hate. Any words you use to distinguish between people is going to carry the baggage of the person using them. That doesn’t change when you change the words.
posted by bongo_x at 11:58 AM on February 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

Handy tip: it doesn't matter. His actions do.

And his language in this article is chock-full of problems. But if we're going to declare someone a homophobe because of their actions, we should include all of their actions in that assessment.

People are complicated and and at times self-contradictory. Part of Baldwin's complaint here is that public figures in the 24/7 CelebriMediaCluster are only evaluated on their failures, while their more laudable actions are quickly forgotten.
posted by Uncle Ira at 12:04 PM on February 24, 2014 [7 favorites]

Has anyone declared Baldwin to be a homophobe? Is there a national registry somewhere? I found this round table from the Gothamist back in 2013, who all pretty much agree that Baldwin is just an asshole. People have talked about his homophobic behavior, but that's not the same thing as saying, "Baldwin is a homophobe."
posted by muddgirl at 12:10 PM on February 24, 2014

He's used his international stage to disseminate language which serves solely to marginalise gay and trans people, to normalise and to reinforce the idea that we're fair game for mockery or worse, that we're outside of 'normal', that we're not worthy of basic respect.

I like this, and thank you for making me think. I agree with you, except....

I would posit that we hold Alec Baldwin to a higher standard, due to his talent, his leftish politics, and the fact that he's so charming (at least he is to me.)

If this were a rightwing plutocrat, then we would be done. But because he presents as a "good guy", we hate it when he says the "bad word."

I doubt he's smart enough (or clever enough) to take into consideration the world. And by that, I mean that unlike the folks who have to live and breathe being transgendered (which he doesnt think about that much), he's just trying to get his kids to school, and he's pissed that what would have been a scuffle on the street, with a few nasty words, has now kinda put the kibosh on any political future.

Which given his anger issues might be a good thing?
posted by valkane at 12:17 PM on February 24, 2014

Baldwin quacks like a homophobe

Oh for crying out loud. I'm gay and even I know he isn't a homophobe, just someone who said some stupid shit. Let's get some perspective and keep our eye on the real villains, please.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:19 PM on February 24, 2014 [15 favorites]

Has anyone declared Baldwin to be a homophobe?

You linked to an article which states that the internet and headlines are full "hundreds of thousands" of people saying just that, followed by 5 people disagreeing.
posted by bongo_x at 12:21 PM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

As I said, I have never used the word because it seems dismissive and far too cutesy, but I don’t hear it and immediately think "bigot". I might get the impression that that person is uncomfortable or unfamiliar, but that’s not the same as hate.

Yeah, but see, once someone lets you know the word is offensive, from there on out it's not really about you anymore. Your intention is a lot less important than the effects your action have on others. And, sure, maybe you have a sophisticated semantic analysis that takes intent into account and all that…but so what?

More broadly, the idea that it's about intent, not context and external effect, would seem to rely on telepathy at best and ungrounded projections at worst. It's a really, really, really bad way to go about trying to evaluate these sorts of things for these reasons.

Any words you use to distinguish between people is going to carry the baggage of the person using them. That doesn’t change when you change the words.

This, however, is patently false. "Ms." and "c***" are both gendered terms and thus person-distinguishing terms, but one has very different baggage than the other.
posted by kewb at 12:21 PM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

I like how all the Bladwins are reprehensible fucks, each in their own special way.
posted by kjs3 at 12:29 PM on February 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

This just blew my mind: from November 2013, Ann Coulter defends Alec Baldwin. A bunch of this is very wrongheaded (kneejerk hatred of feminists, SO much more), I was just really surprised to see these two worlds colliding like this. Very strange.

his complaints about being stalked by the paparazzi predates him yelling homophobic slurs in public.

I think you mean to say that his practice of yelling homophobic slurs in public predates his complaints about being stalked by the paparazzi.

e.g., this house predates the Civil War = the house was built before the Civil War. Unless I'm misusing the word, which is possible.
posted by onlyconnect at 12:30 PM on February 24, 2014

Frankly, before this essay I hadn't even considered whether or not Baldwin hates gay people. Baldwin himself has done more to put that idea in my head (by implying that there is a gay mafia who are out to get him) than Anderson Cooper or TMZ.

You linked to an article which states that the internet and headlines are full "hundreds of thousands" of people saying just that

That's not what the article I linked to says, at all. It says that a google search gets hundreds of thousands of results. That's not at all the same thing as saying that hundreds of thousands of articles call Baldwin a homophobe

If you Google "Alec Baldwin" and "homophobe" you'll get hundreds of thousands of results, all coming from a few outbursts the actor had when interacting with paparazzi, and a Daily Mail journalist. Headlines have ranged from the inquisitive ("Alec Baldwin: Homophobe Or Just A Really Angry Guy?") to the declarative ("Yes, Alec Baldwin Is A Homophobic Bigot"), and his question is a valid one: do the people writing these pieces sincerely believe Baldwin hates gays? We asked around "our realm," and the responses are below.

OK, let look at the "Homophobic bigot" article (which is actually really really good):

I hope that Alec Baldwin as a human being really isn’t a homophobe in the depth of his heart and soul. He may well not be or may try not to be. Friends speak well of him. We all harbor prejudices; we’re all human; of all people, I know what it’s like to get angry and say or write stupid things. People are complicated. They can be bigots in one context and the opposite in another. I’m a sinner as well.

The reason I cannot let this go is the precedent it sets. Baldwin is not just an actor; he hosts a political show on MSNBC. He behaves as a political actor with his support of various causes, all of them noble. He has set himself up as a pro-gay progressive. If we concede the point that because you are somehow formally pro-gay, it doesn’t matter if you hurl murderous homophobic threats against people in public, then we have sold our soul.

I’m not talking about poorly written sentences – like Richard Cohen’s. I’m not gleaning subtle tropes in someone’s prose that might lead to suspicions of bigotry. I’m talking about the crudest of anti-gay epithets yelled in public repeatedly, combined in most cases with a threat of violence. If we excuse even that for the greater cause, then it seems to me we have nothing but cynicism left. And that level of cynicism is deeply corrosive of a civil rights movement.

This seems like a sensitive and thoughtful analysis of Baldwin's place in society and the meaning of his actions in the context of the society that we live in, not the kind of witch hunt that Baldwin is complaining about.
posted by muddgirl at 12:30 PM on February 24, 2014

it was always my impression "cocksucker" as an insult meant something akin to boot-licker or ass-kisser

right. so let's take that a step further: men who suck other men's cocks are boot-lickers and ass-kissers. (Though, for what it's worth, I've always heard it used as a more extreme form of "bastard." Sort of the male equivalent of "c*nt" [in the American usage, as a ruthless backstabber].)
posted by lodurr at 12:31 PM on February 24, 2014

"But Morgan, like Baldwin, never really wanted to learn from his mistakes. He wanted the bad ol’ Twitter people to leave him alone, to rant without consequence to his not-very-large audience, and to never be held accountable. Because he’s a white dude, and that’s what he expects.

I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Morgan and Baldwin are announcing a reduction in their public appearances around the same time. Twitter and the rise of alternative media have allowed the audience to talk back to media figures who previously never heard feedback from the unwashed serfs. And white dudes, historically the most privileged and most unchallenged in our society, are really unhappy about the turn in events." -- Allison Kilkenny on why "giving up is indeed a battle cry of the privileged.
posted by Kitteh at 12:32 PM on February 24, 2014 [13 favorites]

onlyconnect: I think you mean to say that his practice of yelling homophobic slurs in public predates his complaints about being stalked by the paparazzi.

Baldwin's been complaining about paparazzi for years. He was said to have been yelling homophobic slurs in public last fall. So his complaints predate the complaints about slurs.
posted by lodurr at 12:34 PM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

onlyconnect - i'm saying he has been yelling about the paparazzi before they got him on film yelling homophobic slurs - in fact, his original defense for yelling these things is that they were stalking him. so for him to say they stalk him because of the slurs seems like he doesn't even remember who he's blamed for what previously.
posted by nadawi at 12:34 PM on February 24, 2014

men who suck other men's cocks are boot-lickers and ass-kissers

Only the kinky ones.
posted by Nelson at 12:35 PM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

kinky is in the boots of the beholder.
posted by lodurr at 12:36 PM on February 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

I would posit that we hold Alec Baldwin to a higher standard, due to his talent, his leftish politics, and the fact that he's so charming (at least he is to me.)

If this were a rightwing plutocrat, then we would be done. But because he presents as a "good guy", we hate it when he says the "bad word."

He purports to speak on behalf of the gay community and its allies, among whom he counts himself. To that extent, yes, I hold him to a higher standard than I would President Putin.

Being an ally - hell, being a member of whatever community you speak for/with/to - does not and should not exempt you from criticism for using offensive language. When someone says "Hey, that term is actually pretty offensive to me, for these reasons..." and you (general you) come back with "I'm an ally! How dare you call me a ___phobe! Some of my best friends are ______!" it really just makes you sound like an asshole. It will blow over much more quickly if you say "Gah, sorry, didn't mean it like that, apologies."
posted by rtha at 12:36 PM on February 24, 2014 [5 favorites]

nadawi, i read him as arguing that there's a bad-publicity feedback loop (albeit taking a lot of ill-chosen words to make the argument).
posted by lodurr at 12:37 PM on February 24, 2014

Being an ally - hell, being a member of whatever community you speak for/with/to - does not and should not exempt you from criticism for using offensive language.

Or any other action detrimental to the cause you claim to be allied with. That whole thread of entitlement in the piece does kind of creep me out.
posted by lodurr at 12:40 PM on February 24, 2014

I always thought if you had all the Baldwin brothers lined up single file from youngest to oldest it would look a lot like 'The Ascent of Man.'
posted by metagnathous at 12:41 PM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

Okay, for the sake of argument: you are falsely accused of being homophobic in a very public way. How do you convincingly counter that claim? I don't think you're best served by whining like this. (For the record, I don't think he's homophobic, but I do think he's self-centered and his blind spot is shockingly massive. And the "tranny" remark is more ignorance than hate, imho.)
posted by MoxieProxy at 12:48 PM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

Not knowning too much about Baldwin, or caring either, this was an interesting read seemingly mischaracterised in the thread here. The way he used "tranny" was clueless more than offensive and it seems he does have some problems realising that

I got the same impression too. Though, with things like this, I think some people judge that responding with outrage is safer than something more muted, and they're probably right.
posted by cosmic.osmo at 12:55 PM on February 24, 2014

rtha: ""The idea that tranny is offensive is relatively new and not commonly understood, even in the gay community."

May depend a lot on what gay community you are in (there are lots!); from my experience, it's really not a term that should be used in public unless you mean to be insulting, and if you don't mean to be insulting and someone tells you it's insulting, you go "Oh, sorry - didn't know! Thanks!"

As an in-group term, it may be okay to use it in certain contexts. I used to hang out with a bunch of gay guys who used "faggot" as a term of affection within that group, but being called that by someone not in that group was not okay."

I feel the need to push back (along with rtha's comment above) against the idea that the idea that 'tranny' is offensive is 'relatively new' or that Metafilter is 'ahead of the curve' (ha, ha, ha). There are two related issues. One is that the 'gay community' is often really shit when it comes to trans issues. You (the general you) don't get to use their transphobia as an excuse. The other thing is what does "relatively new" mean? We're talking decades. That people have refused to listen doesn't mean they weren't being told it was offensive.
posted by hoyland at 12:55 PM on February 24, 2014 [7 favorites]

nadawi -- oh okay, I didn't understand your point but I get it now. Sorry about that.
posted by onlyconnect at 12:59 PM on February 24, 2014

Okay, for the sake of argument: you are falsely accused of being homophobic in a very public way. How do you convincingly counter that claim?

If I'm someone who did what Baldwin did, I say, "I am terribly sorry for using such hateful language, and I am going to try very hard not to do it again." And then I shut up for a while, and maybe get some discreet anger management counseling, and I don't bring up all the money I've donated or all the fundraisers I've been to or all the gay friends I have, because that part should not be about me.

And the next time the paparazzi get all up in my shit, I just remember that I'm Alec Baldwin, and they're not, and that's a pretty good score.
posted by Etrigan at 1:00 PM on February 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

Guys, I know some of you mean well, but it'd be cool if maybe people are a little more careful about repeating slurs in-thread unless it's part of a direct quote and certainly don't all caps a string of nothing but. It's very uncomfortable. For future reference.


You know what? I think this is kinda bullshit. This is a level of overly precious being offended that doesn't accomplish anything constructive. Context is what makes the word offensive. Discussing its use is NOT the same thing as using it as an epithet.
posted by stenseng at 1:00 PM on February 24, 2014 [7 favorites]

Nobody's building up get-out-of-accusations-of-bigoted-behaviour-free cards by their charitable donations or their advocacy. Those things are great, wonderful, and let's not forget he was lauded for them at the time, but they absolutely should not exempt a person from criticism. And really, I think the perception that he's been painted as a now-and-forever homophobe is first and foremost his own. What's actually happening is that he's being criticised and held responsible for his actions in the same public sphere where those actions occurred; the same public sphere which gives his voice and opinions a platform when he wants one. I'm not sure what he, or anyone here, would want that criticism to look like in order to avoid the supposed lifelong tarring as 'a homophobe'. I suspect, from his statements, that he feels he shouldn't be criticised publicly at all, but for the reasons I outlined above, many of us don't see that as an acceptable option.

The thing is, declaring anyone 'a homophobe' is exactly as meaningless as declaring them 'an ally'. In these discussions there's an over-focus on an inherent self, on some inner nature that makes one's innocuous language harmful or harmful language innocuous, and that is somehow conveyed clearly to everyone who hears. I just don't see that as true in any practical sense. Nobody can know and nobody needs to care whether the secret garden of Alec Baldwin's soul contains a topiary shaped like True Transphobia. It's just action. Celebrate the helpful and criticise the harmful regardless of who it comes from. Nobody's exempt.

I do have to add that responding to accusations of transphobia or transmisogyny with examples of all the good things a person's done for gay rights is something I'm incredibly tired of seeing. The T in LGBT is too often forgotten, and while absolutely a good thing in itself and helpful to those trans people who find space there, advocacy for a predominantly cisgender gay community doesn't count as trans allyship unless it explicitly includes us.
posted by emmtee at 1:03 PM on February 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

Guys, I know some of you mean well, but it'd be cool if maybe people are a little more careful about repeating slurs in-thread unless it's part of a direct quote and certainly don't all caps a string of nothing but. It's very uncomfortable. For future reference.

You know what? I think this is kinda bullshit. This is a level of overly precious being offended that doesn't accomplish anything constructive. Context is what makes the word offensive. Discussing its use is NOT the same thing as using it as an epithet.

Nineteen epithets out of twenty-one words is NOT the same thing as discussing its use.
posted by Etrigan at 1:05 PM on February 24, 2014 [5 favorites]

Discussing its use is NOT the same thing as using it as an epithet.

And we've managed to have a pretty good discussion without doing it like this.
posted by rtha at 1:06 PM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

It was maybe a poor choice for comedic effect to make a point, that didn't work out, but wasn't an epithet in that context either.
posted by stenseng at 1:07 PM on February 24, 2014

Because he’s a white dude, and that’s what he expects.
...
And white dudes...are really unhappy about the turn in events.

I'll never understand why is this kind of overtly generalizing bullshit is OK to post here. You know exactly jack shit about what's going on in the heads of "white dudes", Allison Kilkenny. But here's one fucking hint: only one of us is Alec Baldwin.
posted by 0 at 1:09 PM on February 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

stenseng: "It was maybe a poor choice for comedic effect to make a point, that didn't work out, but wasn't an epithet in that context either."

You're right in the sense that that comment could have been more offensive, but it was definitely using 'tranny' to attack people.
posted by hoyland at 1:10 PM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

stenseng: "You know what? I think this is kinda bullshit. This is a level of overly precious being offended that doesn't accomplish anything constructive. Context is what makes the word offensive. Discussing its use is NOT the same thing as using it as an epithet."

You must know - surely nobody is so stupid as not to realise - that in all likelihood, there are real human beings reading this thread for whom these were the words screamed as us before we were beaten, before we were raped? That these were the words in the comment sections of newspaper articles about our murdered friends? But no, god forbid we be overly precious.
posted by emmtee at 1:12 PM on February 24, 2014 [16 favorites]

It was maybe a poor choice for comedic effect to make a point, that didn't work out...

Yeah, that's privilege for you. "That person didn't mean to offend you, so it's not offensive, and it's kinda bullshit that you've adopted this level of overly precious being offended that doesn't accomplish anything constructive."
posted by Etrigan at 1:13 PM on February 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

Yeah, ok. Let's get the thread back on track. I'll be over here twirling my mustache.
posted by stenseng at 1:14 PM on February 24, 2014

Repeating for emphasis:

If I'm someone who did what Baldwin did, I say, "I am terribly sorry for using such hateful language, and I am going to try very hard not to do it again." And then I shut up for a while

I know it's hard sometimes to just stop digging the hole deeper - I've been in that position myself a time or two (not with hateful language but with trying to be Ms Logical and Rational and argue against the lived experiences of actual gay and transgender people). But it's the grown-up thing to do.
posted by muddgirl at 1:17 PM on February 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

Yeah, ok. Let's get the thread back on track. I'll be over here twirling my mustache.

Get off the cross, we need the wood.

No one called you evil, no one accused you of being or supporting trans- or homophobia. People pointed out that it's possible to discuss offensive words without using them in every single sentence and that hey, there are real people reading these comments. You complain about *some* people being "overly precious" and then make a comment like oh, everyone's so mean to you? Come on.
posted by rtha at 1:20 PM on February 24, 2014 [10 favorites]

It's only precious when we do it.
posted by ArmyOfKittens at 1:24 PM on February 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

Get off the cross, we need the wood.

Point taken. Apologies. Carry on, y'all.
posted by stenseng at 1:25 PM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

men who suck other men's cocks are boot-lickers and ass-kissers.

But isn't "cocksucker" used to insult women, too? Especially prostitutes and other low-status women? I've definitely seen it used that way frequently in dialogue in written fiction, and I've heard disgruntled men use it in reference to their ex-wives.

The only reason it's specifically "cocks" that get sucked in the trope is because that's where the power in patriarchal society is. It's the thing being sucked that's the point of the term, surely, not who's doing the sucking? I don't know. I won't belabor the point.

It's a moot point, I guess. I'm not sure how we ever ultimately settle questions like this anymore anyway, since pomo semantics is basically an endless he-said, she-said exercise.
posted by saulgoodman at 1:47 PM on February 24, 2014

Also, something else: the distinction between "genuinely hateful" and "just clueless" doesn't really matter outside a personal context. I don't know Baldwin, just like I don't know the many many people in this thread who are also dropping t-bombs all over the place, so it doesn't matter to me where the language is coming from: seeing that word blasted everywhere is still hurtful and triggering.

You know what? I think this is kinda bullshit.

Okay, look. You've already been duly piled on, but no. I am genuinely hurt by the word. Not theoretical armchairing here, not "pretending" to be "outraged." It is an ugly word with traumatizing associations for me and the site is worse for accepting its usage. I'm not a fan of censorship, but I'm not a fan of seeing hate speech blasted everywhere eiter. 90% of the t-words in this thread are unnecessary for discussing it; a good 25% seem to be ambivalent "well I don't think it's that bad!" nonsense and a good 5% belonging to one post is genuinely hateful. Look at how liberally people are using the word compared to "f****t" and it's evident that people aren't really considering their language here.
posted by byanyothername at 1:48 PM on February 24, 2014 [6 favorites]

I don’t think Baldwin is homophobic, per se. I believe him when he says that he’s surrounded by gay people and that he doesn’t judge them or disrespect them because they’re gay. So does he personally have a problem with gay people? I don’t think so. As a gay person, I don’t think he does.

BUT, regardless of his storming out of it now, he IS in the public eye. Using hurtful language may not make him personally homophobic, but it contributes to a culture of homophobia. Chipping away at that culture of homophobia is really important. The more it diminishes – actually, let me use active voice and say the more we diminish it – the easier it’s going to be for LGBT kids (and adults) to come out and feel safe in the world. Language matters.

I hated this piece. I understand what he’s getting at, and I don’t disagree with his assertion that the paparazzi and the media in general are out of hand and not worthy of respect. But to make that argument, and to defend himself against allegations of homophobia, by using some of the language he uses? It's kind of reprehensible. LANGUAGE MATTERS.

More than anything, I came away from this thinking that while Alec Baldwin may have been unfairly accused of homophobia, he is a dreadful narcissist. He is constantly being wronged, and the people around him are always wrong, and everything about the world is wrong except for the things he thinks are right. [All the name-dropping and public callouts in the article? Really, really petty and really, really off-putting.]

And to me, that puts him in the same class as all the homophobes out there. I wouldn’t want to be in the same room with them, and I would never expect to be able to have a reasonable conversation with any of them.

I truly hope he does exit public life, because whether he’s a supporter of gay rights or a detractor or someone who just couldn’t give a shit, he’s not having a positive effect on the conversation.
posted by mudpuppie at 1:51 PM on February 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

there are a lot of slurs, cocksucker included, that are used to demean either/both women and gay men since one of the biggest ways that gay men are insulted is by comparing them to women.
posted by nadawi at 2:03 PM on February 24, 2014 [9 favorites]

Perhaps I'm just naive, but I've never understood the apparent hostility behind deliberately misgendering trans men and women, or the insistence that they should not possibly have a say in what words they use to describe themselves. I don't understand why people who probably understand perfectly well why calling an African-American person the "N" word is never acceptable in any way, are somehow unwilling to also understand that the use of sexist or otherwise offensive terms for trans men and women is equally unacceptable, for similar reasons.

It's unbelievably sad that trans men and women are still having to fight such indignities in this day and age.
posted by zarq at 2:10 PM on February 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

"Indignities" seems too gentle a word....

To have to fight for dignity, respect, equality, self-identity and the right not to live in fear of one's damned life because of who they are.
posted by zarq at 2:14 PM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

there are a lot of slurs, cocksucker included, that are used to demean either/both women and gay men since one of the biggest ways that gay men are insulted is by comparing them to women.

I'm not disputing the term is used to insult gay men. It's also just used as a general insult for all kinds of different targets. But I think the point of the insult is not to compare someone to a gay person, but to suggest that one is being like a woman or like a man who would bow to the power of another man in the way women are expected to.

It's definitely offensive and gross. I just don't think it's about homophobia so much as plain old fashioned sexism and our cultural biases against people who are socially submissive (and in favor of more dominating personalities).
posted by saulgoodman at 2:39 PM on February 24, 2014

Oh for crying out loud. I'm gay and even I know he isn't a homophobe, just someone who said some stupid shit.

Huh? Are there still people who think that "I'm an X, therefore I get to dismiss all other X's concerns" is a valid construction? Guess so.

Moving on, you ignored the point of the rest of what I wrote. He's not merely someone who speaks without a filter. Based upon what he wrote, he's someone who has some deeply embedded heteronormative attitudes. Who thinks it's okay to trivialize the concerns of gay people by giving them dismissively cute lil burns. Oh that Anderson Cooper, he's just a drama queen, what do "we" expect from him, wink-wink. Hint: "we" is the straight cisgender community laughing at you. And, knowing himself to be indiscreet, that Baldwin just kept upping the ante without even bothering to run his words past PR shows how much he really gives a shit.

Let's get some perspective and keep our eye on the real villains, please.

Sigh that again. Where do I begin? People are allowed to notice more than one thing at once. I didn't call him a villain, I said he was acting like a homophobe. A person can be a perfectly upstanding, taxpaying, GMHC/GLAAD/etc. contributing person who would never dream of committing a hate crime and still be a homophobe, or sexist, or racist. Cut him some slack, he's a cool guy? Well no, not gonna. Despite what people think, being a called on your bigotry is not actually worse than being the victim of bigotry. If he wants to let it all hang out, fine, but consequences happen. Just because he's not a mustache-twirling villain doesn't make his lingering corrosive attitudes okay. Finally, this is an thread ABOUT Alec Baldwin. That's the reason we've got our focus on him and not at the moment on Blazecock approved baddies like Gary Herbert or Vladimir Putin.
posted by xigxag at 2:40 PM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

I just don't think it's about homophobia so much as plain old fashioned sexism and our cultural biases against people who are socially submissive

But I don't think it's so easy to separate homophobia from cultural biases against people who are socially submissive. To me homophobia is inextricably tied up with fear of submissiveness and feminine contamination.

I can't do a google search for the term at work, but personally I would be surprised to hear someone call a woman a "cocksucker" as an insult - it's assumed that we all do anyway.
posted by muddgirl at 2:49 PM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

it's sexism and homophobia - it's insulting anyone who might put their mouth on a penis (or suggesting that someone is just as bad as a person who puts their mouth on a penis).

also, i know with "toxic queen" he was talking about someone who is gay and i thought it was the same situation with the pap who he called a "cocksucking [debated word]" - harder to argue you're not using homophobic insults if you happen to keep hurling them at gay men.
posted by nadawi at 2:51 PM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

Rupaul's song was a minor hit in 2009 (sure sure, it wasn't a "Supermodel" style hit but it was played quite a bit), so I've been under the impression that it's a recent change in the word that has made it a slur to no-longer-be-used-ktx. Rupaul isn't transgender, he's a drag queen... but perhaps I should use the term gender illusionist?
posted by dabitch at 3:12 PM on February 24, 2014

dabitch: "so I've been under the impression that it's a recent change in the word that has made it a slur to no-longer-be-used-ktx"

For as long as I've been aware of myself as a trans woman (late 90s onwards) it's been a slur, spat in hate, internalised and otherwise. Trans women have finally scraped together enough social/political power to make it (barely) known that the word is harmful and hateful, but that doesn't make its offensiveness a recent change.
posted by ArmyOfKittens at 3:17 PM on February 24, 2014 [7 favorites]

RuPaul is not really a great example to use. He's kind of tone deaf on the subject, having said in interviews that he feels trans men and women who find the word offensive are being oversensitive. Which... okay, if people who are actually trans are saying it's a slur, then why the fuck would he tell them that he, someone who isn't actually living life as a trans person, knows better?
posted by zarq at 3:19 PM on February 24, 2014 [7 favorites]

Before commenting, I checked to see if I should refer to RuPaul as "she" or "he." On the off chance someone else is also wondering, Wikipedia says:

"RuPaul is noted among drag queens for his indifference towards the gender-specific pronouns used to address him—both 'he' and 'she' have been deemed acceptable, as he has said: 'You can call me he. You can call me she. You can call me Regis and Kathie Lee; I don't care! Just as long as you call me.'"

posted by zarq at 3:26 PM on February 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

If you pay attention to the lyrics, that song isn't using 'tranny' to refer to trans women. 'Tranny chaser' refers to men who fetishize trans women.

I'm not really in a position to comment on the song as a whole, but it's one seriously complicated song (before you add in RuPaul) and you really shouldn't be inferring anything about language from it.
posted by hoyland at 3:27 PM on February 24, 2014 [5 favorites]

Ok. It's been used on his show too (I read a blogdiscussion about this as people were upset), as an endearing term but I can't find a clip of that so I'll just leave it alone. I was pointing at it only as an example of mega-famous gender-bender who may influence how people watching Arsenio Hall in middle America, or Big Breakfast in the UK, understand which words are acceptable to use and which are not.
posted by dabitch at 3:32 PM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

dabitch - I addressed that in this comment. It's a really common justification for using slurs in completely disparate contexts than the original context, and it never flies. Me calling my girl friends "bitches" in an endearing manner does not justify anyone calling me a "5 ft 7 in bitch" in a essay about me, or using it as a slur against another woman.

Emerging fashion designer Christian Siriano was heavily criticised for his use of the word tranny back in 2008, and he rightfully apologized and said he was removing it from his vocabulary. So no, this is not a "new thing" at all - if anything, it's a sign of the growing voice of the transgender community in public culture.
posted by muddgirl at 3:44 PM on February 24, 2014 [5 favorites]

Cut him some slack, he's a cool guy?

He's a dumb celebrity asshole with a big ego, who at great personal cost tangled with bigger egos sponsored by an entertainment media machine bigger than them all. You and others feed this machine by reacting out of all proportion to some dumb shit that came out of his mouth, as if this guy is some kind of monster who speaks for or even acts in support of an anti-gay agenda.

That's the reason we've got our focus on him and not at the moment on Blazecock approved baddies like Gary Herbert or Vladimir Putin.

Dumb shit out of Alec Baldwin's mouth apparently begets more senseless, dumb shit from his most strident, rageaholic critics.

I will say this: As a gay man, I was just as embarrassed by this site when we had a similar sort of discussion about Macklemore not too long ago. Not only do some people just don't care who their allies are, they not only don't care who the real bad guys are, but now some people can't even figure out how patently insane it is to put Baldwin and Putin on the same plateau — or even anywhere on the same landscape, for that matter.

I don't know if RuPaul is right or wrong about response to terminology being an overreaction. He's been much closer to transgendered people for most of his long life, certainly compared with 99.99% of the people in this thread, so I'd probably give more weight to his deep viewpoint and nuanced understanding more than those here.

But one thing Ru does understand cold is his observation and warning (and I'm paraphrasing from an interview here) that society's acceptance and revulsion to (sexual) minorities has historically been in a constant, unceasing tug-of-war.

Right now, mass media is basically an arm of the state, if not a ruling entity unto itself. When it directs its energies at attacking people for issuing racist, sexist or homophobic epithets, those of us who are its targets: if we don't benefit, at least we don't suffer. That's a good thing. At worst, neutral.

But that fulcrum of outrage could shift at any time, and I think Baldwin, while an asshole, is absolutely right to criticize the lefttright media for fomenting a culture of hate regardless of ideology. That's a dangerous thing to ignore, because the media's great sauronesque eyeball could point its fiery attention right back on us if it suits its purposes: money, allegiance to local political whims, etc.

I could care less about what Baldwin thinks is an acceptable apology for the stupidity uttered out of his mouth at people goading him. But if he had an editor, I'd cut out everything but his observations about the media. Those are the guys you need to keep an eye on, because their reach and influence and ability to manipulate emotions is on a scale much, much greater than poor, old Baldwin will have ever seen even at the height of his now-dead career.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 3:47 PM on February 24, 2014 [10 favorites]

Echoing others here, but 1) RuPaul is not a transgender woman (the language does get confusing here, because drag and transvestism technically do fall under the umbrella of "transgender," but they don't really overlap with people who are transsexual, which is the increasingly common understanding of "transgender"--they're also not necessarily even allies, and are in some ways actually kind of perpetuating transphobia themselves) and does not get to speak for trans women and 2) the song's title is referencing a whole other class of skeevy person. So, bad example all around.

My experience has been the same as AoK's, re: always a slur. It may have at one time been used or claimed by trans people, but it has for decades and decades and decades been a slur used against trans people.

Preemptive: Your trans friend who (probably doesn't exist) has said it does not negate its history as a slur or excuse you as a cis person to sling it around all day. Sorry.
posted by byanyothername at 3:48 PM on February 24, 2014 [5 favorites]

I don't know if RuPaul is right or wrong about response to terminology being an overreaction. He's been much closer to transgendered people for most of his long life, certainly compared with 99.99% of the people in this thread, so I'd probably give more weight to his deep viewpoint and nuanced understanding more than those here.

Well, you know, aside from the trans people in this thread.
posted by hoyland at 3:49 PM on February 24, 2014 [12 favorites]

I don't know if RuPaul is right or wrong about response to terminology being an overreaction.

I do. He's wrong. Case closed.
posted by byanyothername at 3:49 PM on February 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

"I know we all had to move on because it’s Tina Fey’s show and Tina had worked herself to death."

I remember when Tina Fey responded, I think gracefully, to Tracy Jordan's homophobic rant. Besides all of her other work on the show, dealing with this sort of coworker ugliness as a responsible artist must be exhausting. I imagine her hearing about this, having a glass of wine and being reassured that she made the right decision regarding ending 30 Rock when she did.
posted by Morrigan at 3:51 PM on February 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

RuPaul is not really a great example to use. He's kind of tone deaf on the subject, having said in interviews that he feels trans men and women who find the word offensive are being oversensitive. Which... okay, if people who are actually trans are saying it's a slur, then why the fuck would he tell them that he, someone who isn't actually living life as a trans person, knows better?

Well, bear in mind the slur is not only aimed at trans people. There's a big, ugly swath of the population whose concept of the whole business begins and ends at gender nonconformity, and they don't like it, by cracky, and that's all they care to know. The people who would use tranny as a term intended to hurt are not, on the whole, people who would draw a meaningful distinction between RuPaul and a trans woman. Instead, they'd look at, say, a drag queen, a crossdresser, a trans woman, and an intersex person, and they'd use the same shitty word for all of the above.

Which isn't to say that RuPaul gets to speak for everyone under that umbrella, because she doesn't, and I don't agree with her about others overreacting. But I guarantee you she's had the slur used as a weapon against her at some point, and it was probably a lot scarier for her back when she wasn't a household name.

Again, I don't agree with her at all - just observing that she's not speaking from the same place of privilege the way a person who is entirely conformist about their gender would be.
posted by FAMOUS MONSTER at 3:53 PM on February 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

Everybody who's going on and on about the bad words he used without actually talking about the point of the piece (no doubt because you didn't bother to actually read it): You're the problem. You're the reason that TMZ and all these other mosquitoes exist.

Surely in order to be the cause of TMZ existing, you'd have to read it? If you don't read stuff, no clicks. No clicks, no ad revenue, no TMZ.

Annyway. As far as I can tell, having read to the end, withdrawal from public life in this case means not going on chat shows, not doing publicity events for films he's in and moving to a gated mansion in LA. These all seem perfectly reasonable things for someone with a lot of accomplishments in entertainment media to decide to do, but I'm not sure they count as withdrawing from public life, exactly. Nor do I think that doing junkets and late-night TV shows were the things that were getting him into trouble.

Ah, well. On the plus side, LA is not such a terrible place to live. Especially not if you like theater (acting in or watching) - it has as much and I suspect more theater going on than New York.
posted by running order squabble fest at 3:55 PM on February 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

I don't think it's ever been claimed by trans people, which is why Baldwins comment looks so incredibly wrong and like an expert piece of trolling ("female to male tranny" wtf?), but I do recall hearing it among transvestites - rather, Drag Queens & Kings *- the weekend warrior performing partying kind of people who much like RuPaul were not identifying as another gender just dressing up. It's quite different if you identify as another gender, and I don't recall any transgendered people I know ever using the term.

* it's been over a decade since I hung out with party people in NYC, terms may have changed
posted by dabitch at 3:55 PM on February 24, 2014

but now some people can't even figure out how patently insane it is to put Baldwin and Putin on the same plateau

What? Who's done this? What'd I miss? Because I think the only people who mentioned Putin were me and xigxag, and neither of us did what you say was done.
posted by rtha at 3:57 PM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

I think it's important to look at the difference between people who claim tr***y as an identity and those who experience it solely as a slur. Transmisogyny hurts trans women more than anyone else, after all, but we are consistently having even the words that hurt us taken out of our hands because other groups of people, who suffer from transmisogyny far less, want them.
posted by ArmyOfKittens at 3:59 PM on February 24, 2014 [6 favorites]

Again, I don't agree with her at all - just observing that she's not speaking from the same place of privilege the way a person who is entirely conformist about their gender would be.

While it's important to realise that RuPaul's gender is complicated, but the extent to which RuPaul is perceived as non-threatening by cis people (by skirting the pronoun issue, by framing his gender non-conformity as drag and not about gender) is what's making people give way too much weight to his opinions. (I also expect there's a feedback loop, where RuPaul's opinions are influenced by being perceived as non-threatening.)

I don't think it's ever been claimed by trans people, which is why Baldwins comment looks so incredibly wrong and like an expert piece of trolling ("female to male tranny" wtf?)

The idea of reclaiming 'tranny' was actually a thing at one point (like 10 years ago) among trans men of a certain age. Then they, uh, grew up and learned something about transmisogyny.
posted by hoyland at 4:00 PM on February 24, 2014 [6 favorites]

Maybe Hawaii is behind on that growing up schedule? You know fashion takes at least two years to go from New York to LA.....
posted by dabitch at 4:02 PM on February 24, 2014

Anyway there was a point where there was discussion about how/whether/if 'tranny' can/should be reclaimed. The only conclusion that was reached was that the people driving the reclamation shouldn't be men.
posted by hoyland at 4:03 PM on February 24, 2014 [5 favorites]

if baldwin really cared about not using hurtful slurs he would have based his word usage on more than a single conversation with one dude in hawaii. he had many options before him to do this better and he opted to use none of them.
posted by nadawi at 4:08 PM on February 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

I don't really get the hate on Alec Baldwin, except maybe for that rant he left on his daughter's answering machine--that shit was really low and hateful.

But that's kind of the thesis of his article--the media catches him out at his worst moments, whereas us non-celebrities have those moments as well, maybe, but they are certainly not up to the scrutiny of most everyone on the planet. And Baldwin is at the tail end of the Baby Boomers, so there is a generational aspect to him using--or rather, misusing--words like "tranny" and "queen". I'm sure he'll get hell for that from this article alone, and someone will say to him "Alec, you can't say 'tranny' anymore." And that can be another Learning Moment for him. But him saying these things in the midst of an angry outburst...I don't know if I can really denounce him so much, because I've certainly said things that were hurtful for the sake of being hurtful, and I regretted those words afterward.

And for what it's worth, he says he never used or would use the word "faggot," so unless there's some evidence to the contrary, he should be given the benefit of the doubt there. It would be one thing if he were saying "This is my world, you people need to change to accommodate me!" then I'd just roll my eyes, but he's saying "forget it, you're welcome to it, I'm outta here. Off to be a family man and an actor again." That's a respectable attitude.
posted by zardoz at 4:31 PM on February 24, 2014

Come on, the man had an editor. He's writing an essay talking about how super duper not homophobic he is. It's possible Alec Baldwin is just an idiot, but if I were doing that, I'd maybe give it to someone and say "Uh... can you make sure I've not said anything offensive." If I were Alec Baldwin, that 'someone' might well have been GLAAD, who would have told him not to say 'tranny'. His age isn't an excuse either--it's not like 'tranny' is a word that was once the preferred term and is now offensive.

I'm also pretty sure the inclusion of 'tranny' is his own doing and not a cue he took from this kid that he's using as a prop.
posted by hoyland at 4:48 PM on February 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

Baldwin's right. He didn't say "faggot." He seems to have said "fag," though. Preceded by what seems to be "fucking girl." Oh, and there's "what fucking language you want that in?" He's not Putin but he's problematic, certainly.

Alec Baldwin has said in the past that he'd be interested in a political career. With such an anger management problem, I'd deem it unadvised. He has contributed to good causes, gay causes among them, but he is, as a dear friend would have said, "not blessed with self-awareness."
posted by Morrigan at 4:53 PM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

Hey guy, after I read cortex's statement earlier, I realized I should definitely take a step away from this thread. I reached out to him twice today to make sure that I handle this in a way that helps heal.

For what its worth, I'm sorry if used the same triggering language that Mr. Baldwin used and that was further upsetting. As a few of you are still upset by my comment, my silence has not been effective. Sincerely, I am sorry. I will be taking a few moments to read through the thread again and contacting a few of you directly to extend personal apologies.
posted by Nanukthedog at 4:57 PM on February 24, 2014 [5 favorites]

It's possible Alec Baldwin is just an idiot, but if I were doing that, I'd maybe give it to someone and say "Uh... can you make sure I've not said anything offensive."

This is another privilege thing -- the thought never crossed his mind that he didn't already know all of the offensive words and could therefore avoid them except as necessary to prove his point. For most of Baldwin's lifespan, being a straight cis white male in America meant you never had to ask whether you were offending someone.
posted by Etrigan at 5:10 PM on February 24, 2014

For most of Baldwin's lifespan, being a straight cis white male in America meant you never had to ask whether you were offending someone.

Right, okay, and this is the same issue with Grantland. How many readers do you have before you get published? How many of them have the same privilege?
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 5:29 PM on February 24, 2014

For most of Baldwin's lifespan, being a straight cis white male in America meant you never had to ask whether you were offending someone.

Right, okay, and this is the same issue with Grantland. How many readers do you have before you get published? How many of them have the same privilege?

I would say that a more applicable question would be, does New York magazine have a style on how much editing they do on non-staff-written pieces? "As told to" aside, there actually is a question of journalistic ethics if you give someone a chance to walk back a quote, much less walk back a quote in an article that this person has (allegedly) personally written and that will be appearing under that person's byline.
posted by Etrigan at 5:50 PM on February 24, 2014

Right, okay, and this is the same issue with Grantland. How many readers do you have before you get published? How many of them have the same privilege?

Related: Baldwin got a book deal to tell-all about his divorce and the alleged "parental alienation syndrome" he blames his ex-wife for. It's really hard to swallow the complaints about the pain of life in the spotlight when he keeps putting himself there.
posted by gingerest at 6:03 PM on February 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

Alec Baldwin is incredibly smart, incredibly funny, very affectionate with people, solidly genuine, deeply caring, probably appreciates everyone, and he cannot keep his mouth shut in public. That's probably his biggest offense. He talks in public the way people talk at a party with only their friends. I loved "Here's the Thing," though it made me uncomfortable to listen to both him and his interviewees. There's something about his candor that makes other people become incredibly candid with him. And he talks about things no one else talks about. He has said a lot of offensive things, but he mostly upsets people because there's such a weird naivete about him.
posted by Peach at 6:38 PM on February 24, 2014

> the media catches him out at his worst moments, whereas us non-celebrities have those moments as well, maybe, but they are certainly not up to the scrutiny of most everyone on the planet.

Except Baldwin is far from the only celebrity on the planet. I don't recall seeing a TMZ post about Tom Hanks berating his daughter in a voice mail, or a HuffPo article about Harrison Ford screaming epithets at some rude paparazzi.

Even accepting the point that modern media is all about the clicks and the scandal, that doesn't excuse or even explain Baldwin's repeated behaviors.
posted by Frayed Knot at 7:08 PM on February 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

that doesn't excuse or even explain Baldwin's repeated behaviors.

But once you have a rep of having an anger problem, the paparazzi are merciless, I think. They insult and taunt you just to get a reaction that they can photograph to sell and get those clicks. I don't think you see paparazzi shouting rude stuff at Hanks or Ford, but Baldwin and Kanye West get it all the time, because they react to it, and that gets in the papers.

I'm not saying their reactions are excusable, just saying I think there's a sort of cycle as far as the paparazzi are concerned.
posted by onlyconnect at 8:14 PM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

I remember paparazzi yelling rude things at Michelle Williams in the few days after Heath Ledger died (she was my neighbor at the time). She had done nothing to deserve it except have a child and relationship with another famous actor who had recently died in a so called tabloid worthy manner. Paparazzi are disgusting.
posted by sweetkid at 8:21 PM on February 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

Hey, Alec could have always called us. Equality Hawaii's got, like, maybe five people there total?
posted by klangklangston at 8:40 PM on February 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

muddgirl: "I can't do a google search for the term at work, but personally I would be surprised to hear someone call a woman a "cocksucker" as an insult - it's assumed that we all do anyway."

Well, calling a man a "cocksucker" is meant to deride him as some version of less than male, up to and including gay. Insulting a woman by calling her a "cocksucker" is generally only used when meant to deride her for being a slut.

Oh, homophobia and sexism, such an irresistible intertwined couple.

The cozy positioning at the crossroads of sexism and homophobia would make me hate the term "cocksucker" more, except that its punch relies so heavily on shame that it's just quaint and amusing (to me) when that shame is denied. Cocksucker...who considers that a bad thing? Aren't those macho, macho men just dyyyyying for more blowjobs, preferably with a steak dinner?

Mind you, I'm not suggesting that the invective behind it isn't still hurtful. Hostile is hostile, regardless how literally nonsensical the epithets are.
posted by desuetude at 9:19 PM on February 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

But more to the point. Seriously, this very, very smart guy not only falls for the baited trap EVERY SINGLE TIME, but launches this paranoid all-or-nothing defensive stance instead of listening to...anyone, including himself.

Why can't he just acknowledge that yes, he's got some latent homophobic stuff in his psyche that comes out in anger, for which he humbly apologizes? Here, I'll draft it: "I didn't think of those slurs that way before, I apologize deeply, and I guess I have some work to do if I'm going to live up to being the not-homophobic person that I consider myself to be in my personal and professional relationships."

Hell, I don't think the guy secretly holds his gay friends and colleagues in contempt. I don't think he walks around with hatred and fear of homosexuality burbling up in his loud, outspoken heart. Homophobia, like any prejudice, isn't a binary condition with an absolute status of yes or no; it's deeply ingrained in our society and takes work to ferret out. But when he's called out for exhibiting homophobic behavior, he himself gets all reductionist. Either we are agreeing that he's a flat-out homophobe or it's ALL LIES, everything they said, even the parts that actually happened!

But treating your gay friends and colleagues with respect while defaulting to anti-gay slurs to attack enemies doesn't support his blanket denials.

Hey, I grew up with pretty much that exact rationale for racism -- our family loved the wonderful black families with whom we had personal friendships, but unknown black men required wary suspicion -- and it took me YEARS of active self-inquiry to make progress on reprogramming that knee-jerk. This struggle to be true isn't a secret. Descriptively from Avenue Q: "Everyone's a little bit racist, sometimes..." Or more didactically from the Bible: "As you treat the least of my brethren..."
posted by desuetude at 10:59 PM on February 24, 2014 [6 favorites]

I'm confused about how anyone could think Baldwin isn't homophobic after reading his essay . It's not just that he uses a slur against trans people, it's that he's saying The Gay Conspiracy has destroyed his career. Anderson Cooper is out to get him. Rachel Maddow is responsible for the cancellation of his MSNBC show. His credit card ad contract got canceled just when all those Broadway types stopped talking to him. Coincidence? I think not! The running theme of the essay is that he just said a few stupid things that have been twisted by The Gays to ruin him.
posted by medusa at 12:39 AM on February 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

Baldwin has made so many offensive statements; why didn't he get dumped from (more)shows and commercials and shunned, like Paula Deen?

This is honestly a rare case where I think charges of liberal media bias have some merit.
posted by to sir with millipedes at 3:50 AM on February 25, 2014

Parts of this conversation have been leaving me with the feeling that I was really out of the loop on American English vernacular usage, so I checked common definitions of cocksucker to see if my recollection of it as an extreme analog of "bastard" was off-base.

They're all over the map. The more formal sources (like dictionary.com) privilege the sense of being "low and despicable" or "weak." The less formal sources (like Urban Dictionary and Wiktionary) privilege the sense of being someone aggressively assholish. (Which is an interesting contrast in that dictionary.com is the source that offers this gloss on the etymology: "Used curiously for aggressively obnoxious men; the ancients would have understood the difference between passive and active roles; Catullus, writing of his boss, employs the useful L. insult irrumator, which means 'someone who forces others to give him oral sex," hence "one who treats people with contempt.'")
posted by lodurr at 6:13 AM on February 25, 2014

Parts of this conversation have been leaving me with the feeling that I was really out of the loop on American English vernacular usage, so I checked common definitions of cocksucker to see if my recollection of it as an extreme analog of "bastard" was off-base.

Right, but we're not talking about the meaning so much as what it means to use a noun derived from a particular sexual act pejoratively. It's like calling, I don't know, a video game 'gay'. It's irrelevant that the video game doesn't have a sexual orientation.
posted by hoyland at 6:20 AM on February 25, 2014

Alec Baldwin is probably not homophobic in daily life practice. However: the dude does have a hair trigger temper that goes off at the slightest provocation. And when his temper goes off, he immediately says the worst, most below the belt things he can possibly think of to say. He may not have much control over it, but it doesn't sound like he is super concerned at GETTING control over his mouth either. So all things considered, him keeping out of the public eye is probably all for the best (but yeah, we'll see how long that lasts).

Mostly the whole problem to me seems to be his temper. I like him as an actor, but I'd be terrified of ever having to encounter him IRL. It's probably like hanging out at the top of an active volcano.
posted by jenfullmoon at 7:26 AM on February 25, 2014

It's like calling, I don't know, a video game 'gay'. It's irrelevant that the video game doesn't have a sexual orientation.

I dunno, Dragon Age 2 was pretty bisexual
posted by NoraReed at 7:33 AM on February 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

What I got mostly from the piece was this sort of repellant victimization of himself. I mean, it's the difference between somebody saying, x is a problem because of x y and z, and somebody saying, x is a problem because it hurts me in various ways that are horribly annoying, and thus you should care.

And that reaction is w/o any guesses as to whether or not Baldwin is a homophobe (although as others in this thread have noted, if this essay's purpose was in significant part to establish he does not engage in homophobic speech/thought, man, what a waste of ink)
posted by angrycat at 7:37 AM on February 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

One young man, an F-to-M tranny, said, “Are you here to get dry-cleaned, like Brett Ratner?” Meaning I could do some mea culpa, write them a six-figure check, go to a dinner, sob at the table, give a heartfelt speech, beg for forgiveness. I thought to myself: Beg for forgiveness for something I didn’t do?

He's having conversations with straw (wo)men. The quote mark ends at Ratner. But the stand he takes is against "begging for forgiveness", which nobody actually asked him to do.

I can't imagine being in a personal relationship with him, if this is how he make a case for himself, if he exaggerates what he thinks you mean, painting it in terms like you're trying to humiliate and immasculate him.

No worse a foible than any of us have, but I'd certainly give him wide berth.
posted by vitabellosi at 9:48 AM on February 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Oh God I wish Alec Baldwin would just go far, far away. He's become so utterly repugnant to me that I can't watch anything that he's in -- all I can think about is what an insufferable asshole he is. (And it pisses me off, because damn it, I wanted to enjoy 30 Rock, but every time he appeared on the screen I wanted to throw something at him.
posted by sarcasticah at 3:01 PM on February 25, 2014

I remember reading a profile of him years ago, where he talked about how when he was starting out he always felt he had to sleep with his female co-star or he wasn't really doing it right. But that then someone came up to him and said 'hey, you're becoming like Jeff Goldblum. That guy could have a career if he could keep his pants on.' (IIRC that's pretty close to a quote, BTW.)

So he's had a long history of saying stuff in published interviews that he has to know wasn't smart to say.
posted by lodurr at 3:30 AM on February 26, 2014

Mr Baldwin is the cover story.
posted by Wordshore at 4:37 AM on February 26, 2014 [1 favorite]