I think the moral arguments aside, there is just the practical matter that having read what he did, I cannot stomach to consume content made by him. The association is naturally aversive, I don't need a rational argument about how it's immoral to support a rapist - I just don't like it.
it is a fairly complex topic, I think McBride sides with the moderate and centrist Democrats and aligns with political pragmatism that tends to be business friendly and puts ideology aside in favor of deal-making.
On the one hand pragmatism makes sense because politics is about outcomes, and without deal making and compromises nothing happens.
On the other hand, being fundamentally pragmatic means being willing to compromise on anything and a dynamic can arise that allows for a race to the bottom such that the outcomes that are achieved are too far away from what is acceptable, and what is sacrificed is too much.
Furthermore, McBride has an extra burden as a trans woman to signal her loyalty to the pragmatic, more conservative Democratic leadership so she isn't left out on the assumption her identity aligns with the Progressive Democrats who are more ideological in their commitments (and who are more vocally pro-trans than the rest of the party) and are thus more demanding and less interested in compromising (which can be used as a political strategy itself to influence the Overton window, etc. - but which can be politically risky if by not compromising you don't get any of the outcomes you needed).
I think a lot of us trans girls are in the same situation. I learned to read on HP books, and Hermoine was a deeply important character to me growing up 😅 It's hard for me, but I have gradually moved away from the series as it increasingly becomes associated with Britain's Top Transphobe.
ick, I wouldn't be surprised if that fails commercially ... I mean, I watched the first season before all this stuff came out and I'm certainly not returning for a second season - I doubt I'm alone.
oo, I didn't know about this, thank you - GERM is much better than TERF, lol
This is a good moral compromise in that it allows you to enjoy the art without the moral complications of commercially supporting a rapist, but I think some people might argue that it doesn't go far enough and that we should essentially culturally boycott the art as well, that an artist's reputation rests partially on how their art is perceived, and by continuing to enjoy that art and share it with others, you continue to support the artist in some sense.
Not sure I know how I feel about that argument, but I think it's an intuition some folks have or an argument they make.
... was that a drag pun? well done. 👏
tbh my feelings seem to be guiding things before anything like rational morality does - I feel cognitive dissonance about his art because of the association with him as a rapist, and that's enough for me to ditch his art without having to justify it as a moral necessity that others must do as well.
I think my cognitive dissonance was too strong, I got rid of my Gaiman. :-(
But I feel you - his works were important in my life before, I've just been downsizing and even though it wasn't the best, I decided to get rid of mine (not because it's "right" but just because I don't like being reminded of him).
this is actually the main sadness I have re Gaiman, I never finished the Sandman series and I just never will now.
I know there's plenty to be said about separating the work of art from the moral judgement of the artist, but tbh it's just like a taboo, psychologically the association turns me off whether there is a rational justification for it or not.
yes, she sees herself as a kind of martyr and victim of a witch-hunt, which does change how she responds to the cultural backlash she receives for her behavior.
same, lol - I was like daaaaaamn