argument top image

Should we consume the art or products of people accused of sexual abuse? Show more Show less
Back to question

With the rise of the #MeToo movement, more and more victims of sexual assault have come forward accusing prominent figures. From Harvey Weinstein to Michael Jackson to R. Kelly, consumers of art are now faced with an important moral question: should we continue to consume the art of immoral people?

No, because it might be dangerous Show more Show less

Given that art is an expression of one's inner thoughts and feelings, an artist who has pedophilic tendencies probably reflects those emotions in their art as well. A consumer who is really into the artist could be influenced by their twisted minds.
< (4 of 4)

Art created by a twisted mind cannot be trusted

Artists accused of things like "sexual addiction" (Kevin Spacey) and pedophilia (Jeffrey Epstein) clearly suffer from mental illnesses. When people consume their art, they might also be affected.
< (1 of 1)

The Argument

People who are sexual abusers clearly think and perceive life in a twisted manner. To believe that it is okay to sexually abuse a coworker takes special kinds of personalities and outlooks on life that have made people become uniquely cruel. Just like how serial killers often became who they were as a result of conditioning and abuse when they are young, sexual abusers often also have past experiences that have made them who they are. When they express themselves through their art, it will inevitably contain traces of this outlook on life that will rub off on the viewers. Especially when so many consumers are young children who are even more susceptible to conditioning and believe in the things that movies tell them, this is a dangerous product to consume.

Counter arguments

It is quite unlikely that simply because someone watches a movie by Harvey Weinstein, they will gain a sudden urge to sexually abuse their coworkers. His most famous movies, from Shakespeare in Love to The King’s Speech, have almost nothing to do with sexual abuse and coworkers, so it is unclear exactly where consumers will gain the wrong message from. Additionally, most people simply watch movies and consume art passively, not obsessively pour over every single message that is being told to them and internalize everything. Simply because an artist isn’t being boycotted also doesn’t mean that the artist will just be loved and accepted. Consumers can watch Weinstein’s movies while acknowledging the fact that he is a sexual abuser, and they can tell their children that as well.

Premises

[P1] The messages of sexual abusers can influence consumers when they watch their films [P2] Children who watch it are exceptionally susceptible

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] Most art produced by sexual abusers aren't even related to sexual abuse [Rejecting P2] Parents can simply tell their child about the director before they watch the movie

References

This page was last edited on Wednesday, 11 Nov 2020 at 15:54 UTC