I agree in principle. But I'd like to see a little contrition before I extend absolution.
Aside from apparently getting clean, there's no indication in the story Gibson has done anything to atone for what he did. His main transgressions were against his family; perhaps he did some acts in private to make things up to them that we are not privy to.
But it's weird to couch this in the language of forgiveness and redemption when there's no indication in the story the fellow has sought either.
I've no issue with Gibson getting a gig regardless for a simpler reason - the statute of limitations. His transgressions were long ago, and despite what folks on Twitter say now he paid a heavy price for them. Absent continuing offense, I favor moving on after a certain period has passed, regardless if a person has sought forgiveness publicly or not (something I don't place much weight on given how shallow it typically is and inchoate the harm is to the public at large - versus the injury someone like Gibson dealt to those he loved, which may be better dealt with in private for a number of reasons).
But that's different than forgiveness and redemption.
This is a very astute comment and you're right, from what I can tell Gibson has not exactly apologized, though I think this might be a PR strategy more than anything (and may also be tied to some of the legal stuff surrounding his ex).
He told Deadline some years ago: "I’ve deliberately kept a low profile. I didn’t want to just do the celebrity rehab thing for two weeks, declare myself cured and then screw up again. I think the best way somebody can show they’re sorry is to fix themselves and that’s what I’ve been doing and I’m just happy to be here. He who tries, gets.”
Which maybe is actually a better way to say sorry than to just tell the press you're sorry, I'm not sure. I think he's a deeply troubled man with some serious issues passed down to him by his awful father but I hope he really is on a better path now.
It's weird that a lot of people that want to 'scrub' individuals like Mel Gibson from 'polite society' are the same people who espouse prison reform. Also if Michael Vick can be welcomed back to 'polite society' to basically the same job and pay after running a brutal dog fighting ring, surely Mel Gibson should be given a chance.
In 2015, Fox News reported that Gibson gave an interview two years prior to former Republican speechwriter Peggy Noonan for Reader's Digest where he downplayed the number of Jews murdered in the Holocaust,
Of the Holocaust, Gibson told Noonan: "I mean when the war was over they said it was 12 million. Then it was six. Now it's four. I mean it's that kind of numbers game..."
April 11, 2012: Warner Bros. decides to pull the plug on “The Maccabees,” citing problems with screenwriter Joe Eszterhas’ script, TheWrap reports. Hours later, TheWrap runs a copy of a nine-page letter from Eszterhas to Gibson, dated April 9.
In the lengthy missive, Eszterhas accuses his collaborator of announcing “The Maccabees” film “in an attempt to deflect continuing charges of anti-Semitism which have dogged you, charges which have crippled your career,” and states that Gibson had no intention of actually making the movie. When Gibson did express a desire to make it, Eszterhas writes, Gibson said his main goal was “to convert the Jews to Christianity.”
Eszterhas accuses Gibson of having “continually called Jews ‘Hebes’ and ‘oven-dodgers’” during their work together. He claims that Gibson also called the Holocaust “mostly a lot of horseshit.” At one point, Eszterhas remembers Gibson claiming that the Torah mentioned the sacrifice of Christian babies. When Eszterhas insisted that Gibson was thinking of the “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” Gibson insisted “It’s in the Torah — it’s in there.”
John Galliano is back designing after an appropriate length of being cast out into the wilderness for exactly the same social sin as MG. So I get your point.
Two of those men are definitively guilty of major sex crimes, and the third is guilty of murder in fact if not by law. I think there's a difference between that and espousing ugly opinions.
This is a very good point. I don't think anyone is suggesting we forgive and forget when it comes to Harvey Weinstein. Cosby got released from prison because the prosecutors screwed up, but I wouldn't suggest we give him a new show (not like the blind old man could anyways). OJ is guilty as sin and nobody is suggesting we let him back either. But Gibson is almost certainly mentally ill in some way, something that is worsened when he drinks, and I just don't think he falls in the same category at all.
I agree in principle. But I'd like to see a little contrition before I extend absolution.
Aside from apparently getting clean, there's no indication in the story Gibson has done anything to atone for what he did. His main transgressions were against his family; perhaps he did some acts in private to make things up to them that we are not privy to.
But it's weird to couch this in the language of forgiveness and redemption when there's no indication in the story the fellow has sought either.
I've no issue with Gibson getting a gig regardless for a simpler reason - the statute of limitations. His transgressions were long ago, and despite what folks on Twitter say now he paid a heavy price for them. Absent continuing offense, I favor moving on after a certain period has passed, regardless if a person has sought forgiveness publicly or not (something I don't place much weight on given how shallow it typically is and inchoate the harm is to the public at large - versus the injury someone like Gibson dealt to those he loved, which may be better dealt with in private for a number of reasons).
But that's different than forgiveness and redemption.
This is a very astute comment and you're right, from what I can tell Gibson has not exactly apologized, though I think this might be a PR strategy more than anything (and may also be tied to some of the legal stuff surrounding his ex).
He told Deadline some years ago: "I’ve deliberately kept a low profile. I didn’t want to just do the celebrity rehab thing for two weeks, declare myself cured and then screw up again. I think the best way somebody can show they’re sorry is to fix themselves and that’s what I’ve been doing and I’m just happy to be here. He who tries, gets.”
Which maybe is actually a better way to say sorry than to just tell the press you're sorry, I'm not sure. I think he's a deeply troubled man with some serious issues passed down to him by his awful father but I hope he really is on a better path now.
I rather be with sinners that forgive than with "virtuous" that condemn.
It's weird that a lot of people that want to 'scrub' individuals like Mel Gibson from 'polite society' are the same people who espouse prison reform. Also if Michael Vick can be welcomed back to 'polite society' to basically the same job and pay after running a brutal dog fighting ring, surely Mel Gibson should be given a chance.
See I was not aware of Michael Vick being back in the fold. I'll have to read up on that because the dogfighting stuff was pretty egregious.
In 2015, Fox News reported that Gibson gave an interview two years prior to former Republican speechwriter Peggy Noonan for Reader's Digest where he downplayed the number of Jews murdered in the Holocaust,
Of the Holocaust, Gibson told Noonan: "I mean when the war was over they said it was 12 million. Then it was six. Now it's four. I mean it's that kind of numbers game..."
Once again, shitty as hell comments from Gibson but also this predates his other two scandals. The timeline matters.
April 11, 2012: Warner Bros. decides to pull the plug on “The Maccabees,” citing problems with screenwriter Joe Eszterhas’ script, TheWrap reports. Hours later, TheWrap runs a copy of a nine-page letter from Eszterhas to Gibson, dated April 9.
In the lengthy missive, Eszterhas accuses his collaborator of announcing “The Maccabees” film “in an attempt to deflect continuing charges of anti-Semitism which have dogged you, charges which have crippled your career,” and states that Gibson had no intention of actually making the movie. When Gibson did express a desire to make it, Eszterhas writes, Gibson said his main goal was “to convert the Jews to Christianity.”
Eszterhas accuses Gibson of having “continually called Jews ‘Hebes’ and ‘oven-dodgers’” during their work together. He claims that Gibson also called the Holocaust “mostly a lot of horseshit.” At one point, Eszterhas remembers Gibson claiming that the Torah mentioned the sacrifice of Christian babies. When Eszterhas insisted that Gibson was thinking of the “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” Gibson insisted “It’s in the Torah — it’s in there.”
You're so close to being accurate here, except your dates. The unpublished interview was in 2004 and reported on by Fox in 2006. https://www.foxnews.com/story/mel-gibson-holocaust-a-numbers-game
John Galliano is back designing after an appropriate length of being cast out into the wilderness for exactly the same social sin as MG. So I get your point.
Where is the line drawn though? Harvey Weinstein? Bill Cosby? OJ?
Two of those men are definitively guilty of major sex crimes, and the third is guilty of murder in fact if not by law. I think there's a difference between that and espousing ugly opinions.
This is a very good point. I don't think anyone is suggesting we forgive and forget when it comes to Harvey Weinstein. Cosby got released from prison because the prosecutors screwed up, but I wouldn't suggest we give him a new show (not like the blind old man could anyways). OJ is guilty as sin and nobody is suggesting we let him back either. But Gibson is almost certainly mentally ill in some way, something that is worsened when he drinks, and I just don't think he falls in the same category at all.