What can we learn from Afroman punching a woman in the face and other celebrity screw-ups?

Posted on August 04 2016

On Monday celebrity toker Afroman admitted to assaulting a female fan after a video surfaced of him open-palm slamming the victim to the floor, mid-way through a guitar solo. Following the attack he was taken off stage by the police who arrested him for simple assault, later being released after fronting a $300 bond. 

Clearly violence is never justified whether the victim is male or female but the mainstream media predictably put the emphasis on the fact that the victim happened to be a woman, instead of using a gender-neutral pro-noun like victim or fan. Which is a sad affront on gender equality campaigners. 

Many news platforms actually took the time to use CAPITAL LETTERS when referring to the WOMAN to stir the metaphorical outrage pot. Other outlets neglected that she interrupted his performance at all and simply ran with: "Afroman arrested after punching female fan." As though this act of Ike Turner-ism is just the flippant way Afroman regularly goes about his day. 

Unprovoked as it appears to be, is the attack more significant because the victim happened to be female? 

Of course in 2015 we've all become alarmingly aware of the timeline and format with any celebrity screw up by now. It seems we only do it to go through the motions these days:

Incident occurs. Just hope to God you didn't kill someone. Unless you're OJ Simpson or Amanda Knox, you're probably not going to get away with that one. Sorely misjudged remark, drunk driving, minor drugs offences or sucker-punching someone is about the most you can get away with without a constant stigma clouding your legacy. 

Evidence emerges on social media. Thanks to the proliferation of smart phones and media platforms, we can see celebrities screw up in real-time. We can even watch it again, and again, and again ad nauseam, until our outrage-o-meter peaks. 

Sensational media backlash from major news vendors. You know you've f'd up when Time magazine runs a story about how you f'd up. Major new network are generally the last to get hold of a story because they are forced to at least try to verify facts and details.

Calls for repentance and atonement. People isolated from the event are going to call for your apology. They don't know the full details. They might have even been asleep at the time of the incident but it doesn't matter. It's their God-given right to be offended on behalf of other people, and if you don't agree with that I'm sure someone out there is willing to back me up out of pure unprovoked solidarity.

Compulsory forced apology. Whoever penned the original insincere apology template for celebrities must be very wealthy. Depending on your actions, especially if you just said something dumb, you can generally get away with apologizing for any offence caused rather than the nature of the offence. You have to say you regret your actions. If you've really screwed up you can always throw in a health issue to inspire sympathy. Say you'll reflect on your actions and reassess your attitude in the future. If you're really lucky people will let you off the hook.

Inevitable recoil from those who don't quite think the apology was sincere enough. By this point the criticism against you might be disproportionate to whatever unfortunate action led to this point. Like a metaphorical sucker punch to the face, a fresh affray on your character is coming your way, presumably from gossip columnists. 

Fade into obscurity. At this point it doesn't matter how insincere your original apology was, after being hounded by the press you probably feel a supreme level of regret normally reserved for people who have just lost their life-savings on a weak hand in a poker game. Unless you're of Britney Spears' level of notoriety, it's probably best you lay low for the foreseeable future.

Click play to watch Afroman making a horrible mistake that he more than likely definitely regrets:



  • 1: March 10, 2015


  • Squids: February 19, 2015

    Actually someone has found evidence that O.J’s son may have been the murderer but not anywhere near enough to stand up in a court- it is all circumstantial and speculation, there is no evidence to put him at the scene and the investigation methods have been criticised since. This many years after a case as unclear as this it’s easy to find other potential suspects but it still doesn’t mean that he didn’t do it.

  • kiefcrumbs: February 19, 2015

    I stopped reading at OJ Simpson. Its been proven(outside of court) he wasnt the killer. He didnt get away with murder, HE DIDNT DO IT! Do some research before you write an article and just look dumb.

Leave a comment

Recent Posts