Splitsider

On One Night at Asssscat, or What to Do With a Date Rape Monologue

Are there reasonable people who are asking to "ruin" Eric Angell? Or is that just a straw man argument? Anyone is entitled to watch a confessional monologue and interpret whether or not something is hateful, misogynistic, racist, etc. within that monologue based on what they saw. And Eric Angell has every right to reply to those comments or let the debate burn itself out. How much evidence do we need before we're "allowed" to say that the words he used in that monologue, his body language, his comedic pauses and his physical demonstration of the "fish hook" constituted a story about a rape? Maybe we'd need to sit down with Eric Angell's psychologist, his improv coach, his Second City host-friend and the woman in question before we figured out what actually happened that night, but we don't need that kind of evidence or any further facts to pass judgment on the monologue itself.

Posted on August 28, 2011 at 8:09 pm 0