ONTD Political

Actor Jason Alexander Apologizes for Jokes Made on CBS' The Late Late Show

10:05 pm - 06/03/2012
On last Friday night’s episode of The Late Late Show on CBS, actor Jason Alexander repeatedly joked with host Craig Ferguson about the game of cricket being a “gay sport” as opposed to a “manly” one. Having had time to more carefully consider the jokes he made though, the Love! Valour! Compassion! and Seinfeld actor released a new statement through his Twitter account, explaining how conversations with his gay friends made him realize the effect that kind of denigrating humor has on the adolescents that so often find themselves the subject of it. You can read the full post below:

A message of amends.

Last week, I made an appearance on the Craig Ferguson show – a wonderfully unstructured, truly spontaneous conversation show. No matter what anecdotes I think will be discussed, I have yet to find that Craig and I ever touch those subjects. Rather we head off onto one unplanned, loony topic after another. It’s great fun trying to keep up with him and I enjoy Craig immensely.

During the last appearance, we somehow wandered onto the topic of offbeat sports and he suddenly mentioned something about soccer and cricket. Now, I am not a stand-up comic. Stand up comics have volumes of time-tested material for every and all occasions. I, unfortunately, do not. However, I’ve done a far amount of public speaking and emceeing over the years so I do have a scattered bit, here and there.

Years ago, I was hosting comics in a touring show in Australia and one of the bits I did was talking about their sports versus American sports. I joked about how their rugby football made our football pale by comparison because it is a brutal, no holds barred sport played virtually without any pads, helmets or protection. And then I followed that with a bit about how, by comparison, their other big sport of cricket seemed so delicate and I used the phrase, “ a bit gay”. Well, it was all a laugh in Australia where it was seen as a joke about how little I understood cricket, which in fact is a very, very athletic sport. The routine was received well but, seeing as their isn’t much talk of cricket here in America, it hasn’t come up in years.

Until last week. When Craig mentioned cricket I thought, “oh, goody – I have a comic bit about cricket I can do. Won’t that be entertaining?”. And so I did a chunk of this old routine and again referred to cricket as kind of “gay” – talking about the all white uniforms that never seem to get soiled; the break they take for tea time with a formal tea cart rolled onto the field, etc. I also did an exaggerated demonstration of the rather unusual way they pitch the cricket ball which is very dance-like with a rather unusual and exaggerated arm gesture. Again, the routine seemed to play very well and I thought it had been a good appearance.

Shortly after that however, a few of my Twitter followers made me aware that they were both gay and offended by the joke. And truthfully, I could not understand why. I do know that humor always points to the peccadillos or absurdities or glaring generalities of some kind of group or another – short, fat, bald, blonde, ethnic, smart, dumb, rich, poor, etc. It is hard to tell any kind of joke that couldn’t be seen as offensive to someone. But I truly did not understand why a gay person would be particularly offended by this routine.

However, troubled by the reaction of some, I asked a few of my gay friends about it. And at first, even they couldn’t quite find the offense in the bit. But as we explored it, we began to realize what was implied under the humor. I was basing my use of the word “gay” on the silly generalization that real men don’t do gentile, refined things and that my portrayal of the cricket pitch was pointedly effeminate , thereby suggesting that effeminate and gay were synonymous.

But what we really got down to is quite serious. It is not that we can’t laugh at and with each other. It is not a question of oversensitivity. The problem is that today, as I write this, young men and women whose behaviors, choices or attitudes are not deemed “man enough” or “normal” are being subjected to all kinds of abuse from verbal to physical to societal. They are being demeaned and threatened because they don’t fit the group’s idea of what a “real man” or a “real woman” are supposed to look like, act like and feel like.

For these people, my building a joke upon the premise I did added to the pejorative stereotype that they are forced to deal with everyday. It is at the very heart of this whole ugly world of bullying that has been getting rightful and overdue attention in the media. And with my well-intentioned comedy bit, I played right into those hurtful assumptions and diminishments.

And the worst part is – I should know better. My daily life is filled with gay men and women, both socially and professionally. I am profoundly aware of the challenges these friends of mine face and I have openly advocated on their behalf. Plus, in my own small way, I have lived some of their experience. Growing up in the ‘70’s in a town that revered it’s school sports and athletes, I was quite the outsider listening to my musical theater albums, studying voice and dance and spending all my free time on the stage. Many of the same taunts and jeers and attitudes leveled at young gay men and women were thrown at me and on occasion I too was met with violence or the threat of violence.

So one might think that all these years later I might be able to intuit that my little cricket routine could make some person who has already been made to feel alien and outcast feel even worse or add to the conditions that create their alienation. But in this instance, I did not make the connection. I didn’t get it.

So, I would like to say – I now get it. And to the extent that these jokes made anyone feel even more isolated or misunderstood or just plain hurt – please know that was not my intention, at all or ever. I hope we will someday live in a society where we are so accepting of each other that we can all laugh at jokes like these and know that there is no malice or diminishment intended.

But we are not there yet.

So, I can only apologize and I do. In comedy, timing is everything. And when a group of people are still fighting so hard for understanding, acceptance, dignity and essential rights – the time for some kinds of laughs has not yet come. I hope my realization brings some comfort.

Thanks,
Jason


Source.

What do we think?
bnmc2005 4th-Jun-2012 02:14 am (UTC)
I feel like this is a good write up. It's not just 'OMG I'm sorry 'some' people were offended, or 'OMG some people can't take a joke'. I think he did his best to speak to the heart of the issue, which is a quite surprising read, actually.

In short this is the first , "I have gay friends" apology that actually reads like he does have and listened to some gay friends.
schexyschteve 4th-Jun-2012 02:29 am (UTC)
I agree. This is how you do a sincere apology.
nesmith 4th-Jun-2012 02:31 am (UTC)
If anything, he's doing the reverse of the whole "I have gay friends" thing which is used as an excuse; he's saying "I have gay friends who schooled my ass to why this was wrong, and I'm considering their feelings and realize how fucked-up my 'jokes' were."

It's a lot more empathy than a lot of these "entertainer screws up and apologizes" things go.
jblankbluth 25th-Jul-2012 01:13 am (UTC)
This is late but...

They didn't school his ass. They explored the reasons together.

"at first, even they couldn’t quite find the offense in the bit. But as we explored it, we began to realize what was implied under the humor"

See, what I'm imaging is Alexander had an out: his gay friends didn't see the offense. So he had the chance to let it slide, passing it off as some overreaction from over-sensitive, easily offended people. Instead, he discussed and explored the issue. He was informed, not schooled.
strandedinaber 4th-Jun-2012 12:21 pm (UTC)
Agreed. Definitely one of the best apologies I've seen. I approve. I mean, I disapprove of him saying it in the first place but people aren't perfect and most people have to progress from a place of not getting to actually getting it.
astridmyrna 4th-Jun-2012 02:29 am (UTC)
Best apology I've read, TBH. He doesn't excuse his behavior and doesn't go all "sorry you were offended" either.
porcelain72 4th-Jun-2012 02:33 am (UTC)
This is how you do an apology. He acknowledged that he offended people (none of this "if anyone was offended" bullshit, he gave it some thought, and admitted that he should have known better. It's much more sincere than "Gee, I didn't realize everyone was so touchy, sorry!", which makes you sound like a sullen 10 year-old who's been forced to apologize for something when they don't think they've done wrong.
alierakieron 4th-Jun-2012 02:33 am (UTC)
Wow. I have to say, my opinion of him went way up after reading this, if only because it shows genuine humility and understanding of his error and doesn't try to dodge it. Well done, sir. I still wish you had never said it, but good on you for owning up.
devour_theflesh 4th-Jun-2012 02:40 am (UTC)
The only part that makes me say "hm" is that... I find it hard to believe he didn't get why that was offensive in the first place. Maybe this is me speaking from my point of view, but I assume when you insult something by calling it "gay," you understand that you're using "gay" as an insult. And I find it hard to believe that he and his gay friend had difficulty at first understanding where the offense was coming from.

It's nitpicking, I guess, but my absolute pet peeve is weaselly apologies, and I can't think of a politician or celebrity yet whose given a whole-hearted sincere one.
darth_eldritch 4th-Jun-2012 03:06 am (UTC)
I don't think it's nit picking at all. I agree. People really need to think about what they say or do in the first place. People, or institutions, need to be held accountable for this, no matter how they apologize, and the marginalized person or people are not required to accept the apology.

We all make mistakes, but some mistakes...
ceasetoknow 4th-Jun-2012 03:14 am (UTC)
That was the only thing that missed the mark for me in an otherwise good apology. How else could he possibly have meant it? That the players were literally fellating each other on the field (though that would definitely make cricket less boring)? And if he wasn't using "gay" to mean being gay/committing gay acts, then what other way could he have meant in other than gay=bad?

I guess being straight gives you the privilege of being able to walk around with your head that far up your ass and still being able to function. At least he got there in the end though and hopefully it won't be the end of his reassessing his own behaviour.
bluelarkspur 4th-Jun-2012 05:45 am (UTC)
Wait, what's so hard to believe about that? Yes, it seems very self-evident when you sit down and think about it, that when you use X as an insult, you're saying that being X is bad. But most people don't think about all the possible ramifications of their words - they absorb what the language they hear, even if they don't take in the attitudes that underline the language. I'm a woman who never held overt anti-feminist ideas, but for years I was using gendered insults. I can point to so many reasons why I should have known better, but it never even entered my mind.

I know plenty of people who are 100% pro-gay rights, don't mind at all seeing gay couples affectionate, who still have said "ugh, so gay", etc. One defense I've heard is "I didn't mean it as gay like in homosexual, I was using the word in a different way." Which obviously doesn't make it right - since that new definition descends from and reflects on the "homosexual" definition - but it's just been sort of ingrained and it sometimes has to be spelled out why that's offensive. (And especially if, as he seems to have been doing, gay is used to refer to a stereotype - plenty of people seem to have a hard time understanding why that is problematic.)

I don't see what's weaselly about that statement, basically. It's awesome that you apparently grew up with a perfect understanding of how words function, but in my experience, most people don't. They take in the insults they hear around them and ape them. Which isn't a good thing, but the world's not a perfect place. Unless it's coming from, I dunno a gender and sexuality professor, I don't think it's unrealistic or disingenuous for a person to say that they just hadn't thought about it too hard before. The real measure IMO is that the person listens to the offended party and doesn't continue to argue that it wasn't offensive.

Edited at 2012-06-04 05:51 am (UTC)
oceandezignz 4th-Jun-2012 06:22 am (UTC)
The real measure IMO is that the person listens to the offended party and doesn't continue to argue that it wasn't offensive.

Yes!

tiddlywinks103 4th-Jun-2012 06:28 am (UTC)
ita
devour_theflesh 4th-Jun-2012 09:11 pm (UTC)
People who say "I didn't mean 'gay' as in ''homosexual' are so ridiculous. Unless they mean "happy" and they NEVER DO, they mean homosexual and it's astonishing to me that anyone could excuse that.
bluelarkspur 5th-Jun-2012 03:09 am (UTC)
Languages are extremely fluid (as you point out here yourself - the word "gay" has changed plenty over the past century.) The way we understand a term can broaden or narrow, or shift completely to something on the surface unrelated.

People who use that excuse mean "gay" as in "bad" or "weak" or some other general pejorative. Which is obviously the heart of why it's offensive to use "gay" in that manner, but in the context of a widespread societal use, it's not always as simple as everyone going "I think that's bad, so I'll compare it to homosexual people." The word starts out that way, but then becomes more widespread and the original connotation becomes lost to the speaker. "Gay=bad" becomes a separate, distinct word from "gay=homosexual" for them (the same way court as a verb is a completely different word from court as a verb, for example.) Most people don't sit down and think about the words they say, just absorb what they hear. And hearing "that's so gay", without any direct reference to homosexuality, they'll take in just a simple pejorative use.

You seem to find this concept hard to believe, but look at "bastard." The dictionary provides two definitions: "an illegitimate child" or "an offensive or disagreeable person — used as a generalized term of abuse." It's very clear how these words relate, and it's offensive when you connect that. But I can promise you that the guy shouting "bastard!" at the car that cut him off isn't thinking about illegitimacy.

I don't mean this as an excuse, because it is offensive and people should take responsibility for words, and obviously people are allowed to feel whatever they want about a statement, no matter what the intent or apology. And people need to be called out for using "gay", "retard", etc., as insults, because it's not simply the word's evolution - those simultaneously remain terms that identify a group of people. I'm simply addressing your comments about how a grown person not thinking through these issues and using words like this without meaning it, is somehow unbelievable. In a perfect world, yes, but as far as I can tell, I'd presume the opposite - that most people haven't thought this through. Homophobia/sexism/ableism/etc. is just so pervasive in our culture that the language of it seeps in, even with people who don't overtly hold those views (and while it seems like it should be evident the moment you sit down to think about it, some people do have a harder time getting it, and I have no doubt privilege plays a big role in that.) I sincerely would like to go live where you live, if this is so astonishing to you.
devour_theflesh 5th-Jun-2012 10:45 am (UTC)
I absolutely believe that people use "gay" a a perjorative without thinking about it. What I don't believe is that they don't mean it as an insult and that they've created some new meaning of it that isn't related to homosexuality. I think theyre just casually homophobic. I find it more similar to the time when I heard someone call someone else a "lazy Mexican." And maybe if he'd said "I at first didn't understand what I'd said wrong," because he obviously didnt. But for him to say, "my gay friends and I couldn't figure this out," is what is ridiculous and weaselly. The implication is that the insulting part of the language is hard to find but they had a discussion and googled a little and figured it out. No way. Unless these "friends" are on his payroll.
spiffynamehere 5th-Jun-2012 01:17 am (UTC)
It should not take you and several friends forming a think tank to come to the conclusion that "using gay to mean this negative thing = bad".
suzycat 16th-Jun-2012 12:52 am (UTC)
I agree with this comment!
dustbunny105 4th-Jun-2012 06:51 am (UTC)
I assume when you insult something by calling it "gay," you understand that you're using "gay" as an insult.

Perhaps he didn't think of his use of "gay" in this instance as an insult? I've seen people who would call out the use of "that's so gay" but not think twice about describing, say, a man doing needlepoint as "gay". I haven't seen the segment, but his apology reads to me like he didn't find the usage offensive because it lacks the immediate implication that "gay" is a bad thing.
sparkindarkness 4th-Jun-2012 11:51 am (UTC)
Yes. The whole apology is on the whole good - but the premise is shaky and "I and my gay friends all had to sit down and think about this" implies that it isn't obvious and that the insult is more reasonable. And I don't buy it, I don't buy that he and his gay friends couldn't instantly twig why he was wrong
eversofar 4th-Jun-2012 03:28 am (UTC)
that's nice, except:
1. he was the one who brought up cricket in the first place
2. he did more than call it "a bit gay", i.e. describing cricket players' pitching as a "queer british gay pitch" and just repeating how gay cricket is
dancingspiral 4th-Jun-2012 03:47 am (UTC)
It seems solid. There's no "if you were offended" bullshit and no, "abloobloobloo, my feelings as a straight person who doesn't understand gay issues."</p>

He acknowledged his mistake and his ignorance, spent time trying to figure out why he was wrong, and then apologized sincerely. I both respect and appreciate that.

tilmon 4th-Jun-2012 04:39 am (UTC)
I'm old and straight, and I know better than to use "gay" as a perjorative. It bothers me no end that it is used so carelessly, just like it bothers me that "retard" is used as if there are no human beings routinely beaten up and derided for their disability. So, on the one hand, I don't think very much of his having gotten so far in life without ever thinking of how his words can hurt. On the other, he seems to sincerely get it now, and maybe is willing to educate others. So, I'll give him a pass if he does indeed begin to stand up for victims of bullying.
suzycat 16th-Jun-2012 12:54 am (UTC)
I must admit it surprised me to read about this joke too, given that Jason Alexander has played gay men in movies before and, being an actor of a certain age, can't possibly have not met any gay people in his life. It would seem self-evident that it's going to hurt. But I do think his apology is a good one.
nutmegdealer 4th-Jun-2012 05:09 am (UTC)
a sincere apology that i believe he actually wrote?! good for him.
little_rachael 4th-Jun-2012 06:01 am (UTC)
It's good, although he doesn't seem to know that comedians are often some of the worst offenders, in spite of their "tried and true" material. They just often decide to be assholes about it and not listen.

Not that the above detracts from his apology in any way.
tiddlywinks103 4th-Jun-2012 06:23 am (UTC)
I like that he went from 'not getting it' to 'omfg, what am I DOING??!?". It makes his thought process and apology seem more sincere, even if he was little "I,I,I" about it.
riath 4th-Jun-2012 09:23 am (UTC)
It's a good apology and I do give him credit for owning up to his insensitivity.

On the other hand, wtf is up with the line "queer british gay pitch"? Brits are all "gay" for liking cricket or something? Is it supposed to be insulting to British people too? Why throw that in? I don't really get why people feel the need to insult things that they don't understand. So you don't get it, why not make a joke out of that?

And because the cricket geek in me can't resist, cricket has been played in America, NYC had a team back in the 1800s. Compton in LA has a cricket club that been helping to get kids out of gangs and off the streets. /csb
mysid 4th-Jun-2012 10:38 am (UTC)
This letter should be required material in a "How to Craft an Apology" class.
sparkindarkness 4th-Jun-2012 11:24 am (UTC)
I'm glad that he's sat and thought about why such homophobic language is damaging, it shows a search for understanding rather than just a PR exercise. To me, this means the apology is actually genuine. It means he's sat down and realise "yeah, I was wrong" and why he was wrong. It shows an actual, real apology, far better than 99% of the apologies out there.


But it isn't perfect.
I question why it took such a convoluted path of analysis to decide that the gay folks protesting had a point - and really, yopu had to go through this many mental gymnastics to realise that USING "GAY" AS A NEGATIVE DESCRIPTOR IS WRONG? What are you, 6? http://www.thinkb4youspeak.com/ It's not complicated

And minus points of dragging up the gay friends the way he did. It'd be great if he said "I have gay friends, I spoke to them and they helped me see how it was wrong" but by saying they didn't get why it was offensive until they sat down and thought (which, really?), it smacks of lessening the extent of what he said for him. And if he hadn't any gay friends? Why not listen to the offended gay people who have come to you and said "no, that's offensive."

Him bringing in his own (straight) experience as an attempt to show empathy and knowledge - no. Don't do that straight people - I don't care how into musical theatre you are or how much other straight people think you're gay it's not the same.


Still as apologies go it's vastly superior to most of what's out there
tsaraven 4th-Jun-2012 12:26 pm (UTC)
Him bringing in his own (straight) experience as an attempt to show empathy and knowledge - no. Don't do that straight people - I don't care how into musical theatre you are or how much other straight people think you're gay it's not the same.

Yup. This is my biggest side-eye in the whole piece. :/
redstar826 4th-Jun-2012 02:02 pm (UTC)
I can live with this. It isn't perfect, but its much better than what often happens.
uluviel 4th-Jun-2012 02:39 pm (UTC)
I do know that humor always points to the peccadillos or absurdities or glaring generalities of some kind of group or another – short, fat, bald, blonde, ethnic, smart, dumb, rich, poor, etc. It is hard to tell any kind of joke that couldn’t be seen as offensive to someone.

Ugh, I hate this argument. It's perfectly possible to write comedy without making fun of anyone. Yes, it's a bit harder, but don't be a lazy ass and go beyond stereotypes and tropes.
bmh4d0k3n 4th-Jun-2012 02:54 pm (UTC)
And it points to the problem I have with a lot of humor. So many comedians indulge people in their stereotypical beliefs, rather than challenging them, and it's all OK because, "Oh, it's just a joke!" As Bo Burnham (who, though scary good with words he can be, is often problematic) sings:

Because stand up comedy is actually pretty easy,
If you're an Asian comic just get up and say,
"My mother's got the weirdest fucking accent."
Then just do a Chinese accent because everybody laughs at the Chinese accent,
Because they privately thought that your people were laughable,
And now you've given them the chance to express that in public.
kishmet 4th-Jun-2012 10:07 pm (UTC)
Idk if it's even that much harder, but you'd think it'd be worth the effort. Eddie Izzard, my favorite comedian ever, doesn't go after groups at all unless the joke's pretty universally relatable (like his bit on iTunes terms and conditions, or on computer problems, because we've pretty much all been that person at some point). And it's never ever mean spirited when he does poke a little fun at a group (like beekeepers lol, who aren't a persecuted minority so it's a different issue.

Things are so much funnier to me when a comic's not being a dick so idg why more of them don't try this
chaya 4th-Jun-2012 10:13 pm (UTC)
+9,999
harumi 5th-Jun-2012 04:42 pm (UTC)
This is why I love him <3 I never have to worry about cringing.

hii_fashion 5th-Jun-2012 10:48 pm (UTC)
yes this
bmh4d0k3n 4th-Jun-2012 02:47 pm (UTC)
Oh my god, I had to read the fb comments to the article:

The thing with political correctness is, if you are going to deliver such a loquacious apology to the gays you have offended, you also have to apologise to all the cricketers you have offended.

Photobucket
curi_o 30th-Jul-2012 06:37 am (UTC)
By what? Calling them gay? Because that is so offensive! OMG, you're gay, which means shame, shame, and badness!

Pah. Cricketers don't get to be offended for being called gay. Gay people get to be offended for people assuming that they're straight because of the heteronormative culture in which we live. And that's different.

In other words, "That's what your gif said."
thecityofdis 4th-Jun-2012 02:59 pm (UTC)
And truthfully, I could not understand why.

then you're kind of dumb, sry2say.

It is hard to tell any kind of joke that couldn’t be seen as offensive to someone.

no.

But I truly did not understand why a gay person would be particularly offended by this routine.

how nice for you.

And at first, even they couldn’t quite find the offense in the bit. But as we explored it

jfc this whole write-up is so masturbatory.

no, it's not the worst apology ever, but... ugh. straight people. really? if this is the best you can do, maybe you should stick to chicken-crossing-the-street jokes. we really wouldn't want you to have to go through these sorts of mental gymnastics all over again.

ffs.
crossfire 4th-Jun-2012 05:54 pm (UTC)
So. There's really two problems here.

First, he used the word "gay" as an insult. Second, he implied gay = effeminate, and effeminate = bad. So he's guilty of being both heteronormative and misogynistic, and I really don't get from his apology that he understands these things. He maneuvers around the concepts, but he doesn't deal with them head-on.

Then there's that whole section about how he and his gay bffs totes didn't get the whole fuss at first, but then after much soul searching they ~figured it out~.

It's better than the usual fauxpology people issue when they show their asses in public, but it still reads like something from a highly privileged person who really didn't understand what the problem was.
lady_borg 20th-Jun-2012 10:03 am (UTC)
My only issue was that bought that he used the joke in australia and that people laughed. Please don't blame australia for your bad jokes. We were most likely laughing at you, not with you.

Edited at 2012-06-20 10:04 am (UTC)
This page was loaded May 24th 2013, 6:24 am GMT.