Culture Wars
They Have Rehab For That?
by Clay Staggs
OK, confession time. I am hooked on Grey’s Anatomy. It’s one of my favorite shows on TV. That said, there’s nothing to ruin a perfectly good movie or TV show like knowing what the actors are like in real life.
I have been reading about a recent dust-up on the set of the show where one of the lead actors (Isaiah Washington, who plays Dr. Burke) allegedly used a slur on the set to describe a castmate who has recently let it be known that he’s gay (TR Knight, who plays George). You can find some gossipy type articles about it here. Washington subsequently issued a statement apologizing. It’s here, and it seemed pretty thoroughgoing to me.
The reason that I even post such trivialities is the latest installment of the off-set drama. It seems that in today’s world, simply apologizing for doing something wrong is just not good enough. You need to go to rehab, and that’s exactly what Washington has done. You can read the whole ridiculous tale here.
This is not meant to excuse Mr. Washington’s behavior in any way, but rehab? Rehab for using a bad word (that he’s already profusely apologized for using)? When I first saw the article, I figured that he was going into rehab because he had some drug or alcohol problem. Nope. According to the ever-present “insider”, the honchos at ABC told Washington that to keep his job, he must “enter a program to examine why he would say such hateful words.” This means there’s actually such a program in existence. Really. I am not making this up.
As a Christian, intellectually, I know that the world has it’s priorities exactly backwards. But in my mind, I still have this (obviously ridiculous) expectation that the offended castmate will just say, “OK, apology accepted” and everyone just move on with their lives. But no. Off to the “treatment facility” with Mr. Washington. After all, why would anyone ever say hateful words?
Posted by Clay Staggs at January 24, 2007 05:28 PM
Obviously, the censure is not because he said “hateful words” but which hateful words directed at whom. The homosexual agenda is front and center in Hollywood and anyone whose words are perceived as an afront to that is going to get a LOT of flack. C.S. Lewis once said that he would much prefer being found GUILTY of a moral failure than be deemed SICK for it. With the former, you can make restitution or serve a specific sentence, (like Washington issuing an apology) but with the latter there may be no end to the “treatment” you will need in order to be “cured.” This seems to be the take here. Washington needs rehab so that he can “examine why” he would say such hateful words. Something is wrong with his thinking that needs help. In one of the referenced articles he seemed to agree with this diagnosis, saying there were obviously “issues I need to deal with in my own soul.” He begs the homosexual community not just to forgive him, but to help him. As is so often the case, the most “open-minded,” the “elite”, are in fact the least tolerant and insist on conformity to their worldview. I think the whole concept of “hate crimes” may reflect this. After all, aren’t all crimes engendered in some sense by hatefulness? The fact that we assign certain crimes to this status and not others has to do with a particular attitude about the mind of the criminal. Being convicted of a hate crime is in some sense worse than the crime of an “ordinary” criminal. But crime is crime isn’t it? Is a serial killer not fundamentally hateful? I noticed in one of the articles that Katherine Heigl, in defense of the actor Washington’s remarks were directed toward, said, “T.R. is my best friend. I will beat you up…I will use every ounce of energy I have to take you down if you hurt his feelings.” Hmmm…sounds kind of hateful to me.
Clay- Great post as always! Peggy- agreed!
Additional thoughts:
1)If we, as a culture, can deem someone as sick rather than guilty/wrong, etc., we can save ourselves from being a ‘judge’, maintain relative standards (rather than objective ones) and have a part in someone else’s restoration/redemption.
2) It seems this idea is common in the criminal justice system as well. The first line of questioning we hear in capital trials often falls to what environmental sources, past or present, could have led to this action? Not motive of the individual (which would have to get into responsibility of action, etc.), but what social ill could have created this situation (and thereby provide reasonable doubt as well).