Alara317 said: The key difference between James Gunn and Roseanne Barr is that James Gun made tasteless, offensive JOKES a decade ago and has done much to fix his image, mature, and grow, whereas Roseanne Barr was saying nasty shit that she actually believed as much as just a few months ago. She made jokes, went away for a while, then came back and made those jokes in poor taste again, showing it's not just a phase in edgy humour but either something she actually believes or is something she's testing the water with. There's no denying that pedophilia jokes are some of the worst you can make (murder, pedophilia, holocaust, stuff like that are all the worst and really shouldn't exist, period), but the difference is that one was telling jokes and the other was telling her story. So for the few people comparing the two, there's a 10 year difference in proximity and a matter of intent. |
Did Roseanne really mean and believe everything she said? How do we know everything Gunn said was completely a joke? Even if by chance she did always mean it, what if over the next 10 years she learns she was wrong, completely changes and becomes as good of a person as Gunn is now, and publicly apologizes and means it? Does that make it ok? If it is ok, then does everyone agree in 10 years time they did the wrong thing by firing her and also agree she should get another chance, or is she banned from the entertainment industry forever? It's not really any different for Gunn either. Whether they meant it or not, if they didn't 'know' they were wrong at the time, but were, and they changed for the better, shouldn't they be given a second chance, or be struck down forever? Based on Disney's reasoning, Roseanne should never get hired again because of what she's said on Twitter at some point in the past, period.
What about these corporations who do background checks into your criminality? Why aren't they doing the same about your personality then if its worth firing you over down the road, especially is it's based on what you did ages ago?