Why You Can’t Help But Love Your ‘Problematic Fave’

rewrite this content and keep HTML tags If You Refuse To ‘Cancel’ Your ‘Problematic Fave,’ Then What?Appreciating art or artists who offend can complicate the idea of cancel culture, especially when others use that as a weapon against your personal values.By Ruth Etiesit Samuel | Published Nov. 7, 2023This story is a part of our weeklong series on cancel culture. Read the other stories here.“Wait, they were accused of doing what?”Few things compare to the sharp pang of betrayal after learning questionable information about your favorite musician, actor or athlete. The initial shock, denial and confusion sends fans careening down a rabbit hole, googling to find credible sources to confirm the allegations. Once the explosive claims are substantiated, feelings of disappointment and hurt quickly surface, then guilt for your own naivete. What’s next? Do you solemnly swear to never support their art again? Erase their songs from your music library? Delete their films from your Letterboxd account? Publicly renounce your support of them with one final TikTok fan cam?Or, do you reserve a special spot for them as your “problematic fave,” rationalizing your neglect of their poor behavior? A problematic fave could be any celebrity, public figure or fictional character that you continue to hold dear, in spite of their ethically or morally questionable stances, actions or accusations leveled against them.Ariana Grande has earned two Grammys, despite the donut-licking incident that shocked America. Beyoncé’s “Renaissance World Tour” has become the highest-grossing tour by a female artist, despite that blood diamond collaboration following her Afro-pop soundtrack album, “The Gift.” Taylor Swift’s concert movie broke an opening weekend record, despite her romantic fling with an alleged racist earlier this year.Gina Rodriguez will continue to be a working actor on Season 2 of ABC’s “Not Dead Yet,” despite rapping the n-word in a widely circulated video. Consumers still bought Yeezy slides and listened to “Ye” after Kanye West said 400 years of slavery was a choice. Shonda Rhimes’ “Scandal” and Dan Harmon’s “Community” are still regularly streamed series with strong fandoms, despite the presence of alleged abuser Columbus Short and the “horrific” Chevy Chase.Ariana Grande, Beyoncé, Taylor Swift, Gina Rodriguez, Kanye West and Columbus Short.Whether systemic or interpersonal, each of these “strikes” against celebs enact varying degrees of harm, yet none of these artists have been barred from work or the public eye. In its distorted form, cancel culture does not really exist for celebrities and public figures. Moreover, every single celebrity, show or piece of media has some stain or impurity. Truth be told, all of our faves are probably problematic, so what does that make us?At first glance, the notion of a “problematic fave” may seem like an excuse to overlook celebrities’ actions or the implications of a piece of media (i.e., film, TV show, etc.) simply because of your own personal reasons: nostalgia, attraction, or plain enjoyment of their product. In extreme cases of fandom, “stans” — a word formed by combining the words “stalkers” and “fans” — will doggedly campaign for the innocence and sovereignty of their chosen fave.But below the surface, the “problematic fave” moniker can be a fan’s attempt to hold space for nuance, dually acknowledging a public figure’s legacy of talent and the potential to harm. Recognizing human fallibility and the unrealistic expectation of moral purity from celebrities could be seen as a more mature approach to engaging with entertainment. No one is perfect, and everybody makes mistakes. However, the standards for what offenses constitute as too egregious to overlook vary from individual to individual. To one person, domestic violence allegations could be seen as worse than fatphobic or colorist comments; to another, they each perpetuate systemic violence in different ways.These conversations raise questions about the ways we appreciate art: When did the media we consume become emblematic of who we are, or has it always been? Is it reasonable to tether your own morality to entertainment, and what does it suggest about your values? How does having a problematic fave complicate the concept of cancel culture?Samir Hussein/WireImage/Getty ImagesChris Brown performs at The O2 Arena in February in London.The evolution of a problematic faveThe term “problematic fave” originated from a then-anonymous Tumblr blog by the same name, “Your Fave Is Problematic.” Boasting over 50,000 followers at its peak, the blog was created in 2013 and “contained long lists of celebrities’ regrettable (racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, ethnophobic, ableist and so on) statements and actions.” There is a wide spectrum of grievances that some people are willing to ignore to enjoy their favorite art or artist — whether it’s Black women supporting Chris Brown, who has been accused of assaulting multiple Black female celebrities, or the “nightmare” that was “America’s Next Top Model,” which is full of racist, fatphobic and misogynistic moments. According to Elizabeth Nordenholt, co-creator of the now-defunct “Your Fave Is Problematic” podcast, that defense can often be chalked up to one’s emotional connection to entertainment. (The podcast is not connected to the Tumblr blog of the same name.)“We all connect with media because it evokes something in us, right? And there’s, eventually, a cost analysis that you make with a problematic fave,” Nordenholt said. “Are the things it’s evoking in me important enough that I can look past the issues? What am I getting, and what am I losing for this? And I think people are gonna have different lines.”She continued, “I think about the things where there’s still something in the story, in the music or whatever that matters. I think it speaks to a really important reflection of the human condition.”“Your Fave Is Problematic” was created by former roommates Nordenholt, 34, and Kristen Bennett, 40, in 2016. “She was like, ‘I just kind of want to have a podcast that’s like the conversations that we have around the kitchen table,’” said Bennett, recalling Nordenholt’s initial pitch to her for the podcast.When did the media we consume become emblematic of who we are, or has it always been? Is it reasonable to tether your own morality to entertainment, and what does it suggest about your values? How does having a problematic fave complicate the concept of cancel culture?Emilia Clarke in Season 7 of “Game of Thrones” in 2017.YFIP’s tagline became “a podcast where we take your favorite thing and ruin it.” In reality, it’s two friends trying to walk the tightrope of engaging in fandom while being socially conscious consumers. The duo’s first episode was released in July 2017; it analyzed depictions of sexual assault on screen, female archetypes and white saviorism on America’s favorite show at the time: “Game of Thrones.” The podcast, and its corresponding Facebook community, served as a medium for Nordenholt and Bennett to facilitate nuanced and thoughtful conversations that other online spaces didn’t leave room for. The podcast’s launch coincided with the throes of Trumpism and the impact of the #MeToo movement; the final episode aired January 2021. In that time, there was a groundswell of frustration that changed the way we engage with men in power but also celebrity culture at large. People felt empowered to call out, identify and name the abuse they endured at the hands of powerful figures. Their list of subjects to address became lengthier and lengthier. Bennett, who lived in Los Angeles at the time, denoted a landmark shift in the concept of a problematic fave since they launched their podcast.Today, you can be regarded as a Bad Person™ for continuing to engage with a problematic celebrity’s music, films, etc. It is a dynamic that often plays out online and IRL. Bennett says it’s a reflection of how the definition of “cancellation” has been co-opted and divorced from its original context. In the last several years, to “cancel” someone has meant a range of things: a personal reckoning, or public displays of self-righteousness or even, a rubric for judging the values of people around you.Wesley Snipes and Tracy Camilla Johns in “New Jack City” in 1991.Today, you can be regarded as a Bad Person™ for continuing to engage with a problematic celebrity’s music, films, etc. It is a dynamic that often plays out online and IRL.“I grew up in a time where someone saying, ‘That’s canceled,’ was a Black thing, and it wasn’t ending somebody’s life. They were just like, ‘Girl that’s over. No one’s interested in that. Whatever,’” Bennett said. “If you used to go to a restaurant for brunch and they…

FOLLOW US ON GOOGLE NEWS

Read original article here