The Whole Golden Globe Awards Ceremony Is Offensive

Ricky Gervais arrives at the 73nd annual Golden Globe Awards, January 10, 2016. (Valerie Macon/AFP/Getty)

In the wake of the 2016 Golden Globes, it seems like all that social-justice warriors want to talk about is the offensive things that people said during their speeches — like Quentin Tarantino using the word “gh*tto” or Ricky Gervais making a joke about Caitlyn Jenner.

But here’s the thing: Like anything that involves that many white people, the Golden Globes is in itself offensive — and we must stop focusing on the little stuff and start figuring out how to stop this atrocity altogether.

In case you’re not smart enough to understand what I’m saying, please let me explain. Obviously, it was very offensive for Tarantino to use the word “gh*tto” as slang in his acceptance speech — a real slap in the face to all underprivileged people in disadvantaged communities — but is it really all that surprising that he did? After all, we’re talking about a ceremony that’s called the “Golden Globes,” a name that suggests that our planet is nothing but sparkling and beautiful.

Hey, Hollywood Foreign Press Association! You know who might not find the globe so golden? The bajillions of people out there who are not at your ceremony because they’re too busy suffering from horrors like starvation and genocide and microaggressions. If you’re going to name a ceremony something egregiously offensive, you shouldn’t be shocked to hear someone use language that fits the same description.

The same goes for Gervais’s Caitlyn Jenner joke. Yes, it was offensive. But what else could you expect from someone hosting a ceremony where there are already strong forces of transphobia pulsing throughout the room? After all, don’t forget that the Globes still divides awards into “actor” and “actress” categories — despite the fact that gender is obviously a spectrum. Some people are transmasculine, some people are transfeminine, some people are somewhere in the middle. Some people are gender fluid and flip back and forth. What if someone identified as an female during the nomination process, but then switched to a different identity before the ceremony? Any event that would risk putting someone in that kind of awkward situation is obviously horrible and must be stopped.

And it gets worse: Not only does the HFPA separate based on gender, but it also separates into categories such as “comedy” or “drama” — as if it what is and is not funny is not determined by each individual based on his/her/other experiences. There are an infinite number of triggers out there, and flatly declaring a movie to be a “comedy” is completely ignorant to the fact that some might consider the film to be more traumatic than funny. Oh, and let’s not forget about all of those people out there who suffer from “pseudobulbar affect,” a neurological disorder which causes involuntary, uncontrollable episodes of crying and/or laughing. These people already feel bad about crying or laughing at “inappropriate” times throughout their lives — do we really need to label our entertainment in such a non-inclusive way?

#share#Is this making sense? It’s not what people like Tarantino or Gervais said in their speeches that’s the issue — it’s the fact that they would be so insensitive as to even attend such a problematic event in the first place.

Thanks for listening. I hope I’ve changed your mind. If not, please stay tuned for my next piece, which will discuss the tragic climate footprint of the ceremony — which, between flights and cars for travel and the meat that is served, will no doubt have you standing with me in the virtual picket lines of Social Justice Internet protesting next year’s offense-tivities.

– Katherine Timpf is a reporter for National Review.

Most Popular

Politics & Policy

John Brennan’s Bad Behavior

My Bloomberg View colleague Eli Lake is right about this: "[W]hen Brennan uses his authority as a former CIA director to launch flimsy attacks on the president's legitimacy, he validates Trump's claim that the intelligence agencies are biased against him." Over the last two years the president's critics have ... Read More
White House

Bill Clinton Redux

Stormy Daniels could have stepped right out of the 1990s. She would have been a natural in a Bill Clinton scandal, and, in fact, all the same means would have been used against her. Donald Trump’s tactics in these cases are almost indistinguishable from the Clintons’. The effort to shut down the ... Read More
Politics & Policy

California’s Pro-Nuclear Renegade

If California’s upcoming gubernatorial race gets decided solely by money, Michael Shellenberger doesn’t have a chance. The latest campaign filings show that Shellenberger, an environmentalist from Berkeley, has about $37,000 in cash on hand. The frontrunner in the June 5 California primary, Lieutenant ... Read More

Encouraging Signs in Iraq

Last year, relations between the Iraqi central government and the Kurds reached what was possibly an all-time low when the Kurds held an independence referendum in which 93 percent of voters opted to secede. The timing was no coincidence: Iraqi forces had retreated from Kurdish territory in 2014 as the Islamic ... Read More
Politics & Policy

Do Not Congratulate

Do you want some good news out of the gargantuan budget bill now making its way through Congress? Buried among the mountains of pork and assorted unmentionables, there is one random provision I really like. It requires the Congressional Research Service -- which does a huge amount of very valuable policy research ... Read More
Film & TV

Superannuated ‘Idol’

In the pilot episode of Fox’s American Idol, Simon Cowell defined the show’s thesis: “We are going to tell people who cannot sing and have no talent that they have no talent. And that never makes you popular.” The show’s producers and its three judges -- Cowell, Paula Abdul, and Randy Jackson -- kept ... Read More