Kevin Hart and Black Masculinity: When Financed By Your Enemy

Kevin Hart is one of the most successful Black comedians in modern times. He has had largely successful stand up comedy tours, sold out stadiums in the multi-thousands, and has landed supporting and even lead roles in major movies with superstars such as Jay-Z, Damon Dash, Dewayne “the Rock” Johnson, Snoop Dog and more. But has the married father, and Philadelphia native achieved his success solely by his own talents, or is there more to the path of stardom that my brother now enjoys?

Kevin Hart has stated many times in his early years that to host the Academy Awards, or “Oscars” as we commonly call them, was a long held dream of his. Well, very recently, it seems that his dream has come true.

Through many promotions and wide publicity we learned that Kevin Hart was slated to host the 2018 Academy Awards. I, very likely like everyone else, was excited at the revelation, and looked forward to his hilarious shenanigans throughout the ceremony.

But then, my brother was attacked. Kevin Hart is not a politician, and has no control or influence over what and how other people choose to live their lives, yet he was attacked as “Homophobic” and therefore questioned as “worthy” enough to host the event.

This was not because my brother went on some recent rant using terms that specific groups of people now consider derogatory or “hateful,” or resulting from some recent incident with someone or group who are of a particular sexual orientation, in which a conflict took place or was initiated by Kevin specifically because of sexual orientation. No, this was because of jokes he told at least ten years ago, at the start of his major career.

According to Hart, back in about 2008 or 2009, during one of his stand up routines, Kevin joked about how he does not want his son to be “gay” and about how if he found his son playing with his daughter’s toys, hew would tell him that doing such as a boy is wrong and Kevin in his routine may have used the term “faggot.” However, in the years as Kevin was climbing the ladder of success, he was confronted about those jokes from back then, and at various points addressed the issue and apologized for offending anyone who would be, by his words.

After all of the promotions of Kevin Hart hosting the Oscars, the producers of the academy resurrected what to Kevin was a “dead Issue” and gave him an ultimatum. Either he will publicly apologize for jokes he made ten years ago, about his own family and household, or they would find someone else to host the ceremony.

Kevin now says that he was “a different person” at that time, and that he today does not ascribe to the ideas from which those jokes derived back then; but says that since he has already addressed the issue on multiple occasions, he will not give further life to what he sees as a solved and settled matter; and thereafter declined to apologize again and passed on hosting the event.

Not long after making that announcement on his social media feeds, Kevin again took to social media and again made reference to the age of the matter, highlighting that it was not recent, and indeed apologized again. This time specifically to the LGBT community. So, why then not just apologize from the start and take the hosting job, rather than refuse to do so initially, lose the job and miss out on that money, then still apologize anyway?

It should not be difficult to understand the forces at play against Kevin in this matter. Kevin Hart, and understandably so, is reacting with the conscious realization that people in positions that directly control his career, and therefore his wealth and thus the current lifestyle he enjoys, are among those that ascribe to the lifestyle for which they would find his decade old jokes offensive. Many of them are in fact entertainment executives with the power to control whether or not Kevin gets work.

So to see my brother Kevin initially defy them and accept losing the hosting job, then turn around and do that very thing which would have allowed him to keep the work was a red flag to me. I saw that with the mounting publicity about the matter, the pressure was put on Kevin, to where it became about more than just the academy awards. For those of us who understand the background workings of the entertainment industry, to see our brother stand on his dignity first, then bow and cave to their assertion and demands, even after taking the “punishment” makes it very clear that an example is being made of our brother.

For him to do this, pointlessly losing a significant payday, and the achievement of a long-held dream of his, makes clear that those behind the scenes made it clear to Kevin that he will not bite the hand that feeds him; and that he will in fact publicly apologize. If Kevin Hart did not return to social media and apologize, this time specifically to their organized body and lobby by name, then it is without a doubt that we would have began to see less and less of Kevin Hart in major projects.

BUT WHAT HAPPENED TO FREEDOM OF COMEDIC EXPRESSION?

I can specifically recall one comedy legend, the late Richard Prior, making jokes about himself having a sexual encounter with a homosexual. Now whether it really happened or not I don’t know, nor do I find it relevant here. But, I do recall him specifically using the very same terms “gay” and “faggot” that Kevin Hart used in his routine. Even more recently, as part of the classic Original Kings Of Comedy tour, the late and great Bernie Mac did a whole segment of his routine in which his sister’s kids snuck downstairs at night for “Milk and Cookies” in which the emphasis was on his gay nephew and his ‘Faggoty’ demeanor.

Comedy has historically been a platform upon which politically and socially sensitive issues could be addressed in satirical or humorous form. I don’t recall when this has not been acceptable since the topics are delivered in a way that they are laced with humor, and fall upon a cushion of laughter and applause. So when did we get to the point where a comedian is not free to do a routine and make jokes about himself and the goings on in his own household?

I don’t recall any, albeit wide spread outrage or even simple backlash from the mainstream when a comedian and former actor on the hit sitcom Seinfeld was recorded in his stand up routine calling black people “niggers” as they walked out of his show in protest of his racially offensive and insensitive content. But Kevin Hart is not allowed to not want his son to be gay, and has to apologize for saying such?

ERADICATION OF BLACK MALE MASCULINITY

From Eddie Murphy, Wesley Snipes, and Jamie Fox, to Martin Lawrence, Ving Rhames, the Wayans Brothers, and Tyler Perry. As spoke upon by many great black entertainers like Dave Chapelle, Kat Williams, Eddie Griffin, and an Icon of the Legendary rap group Public Enemy, Professor Griff, there is a long standing agenda to destroy the historical image and dignity of the black male.

One major method of this attack is to assassinate the character of the black male by directly attacking his manhood. These black greats have spoke intensively about the entertainment industry’s obsession with putting black men in dresses; and how in a lot of cases, refusing to “play ball” or “pay your dues” will significantly if not totally stifle a person’s hopes for a career in entertainment… and so we see this phenomenon.

While many may deny that there exists a dedicated conspiracy against black manhood, I can specifically recall where in the early years of his success, Kevin Hart did an interview at which the topic of black men in dresses was raised. While this was not an inquiry of the sexual orientation or challenge of any suspected homosexuality on the part of our brother, Jamaal Finkley of Black Tree TV, interviewing our brother about his role in the movie Five-Year Engagement, specifically asked if Kevin would ever wear a dress. Kevin Hart responded verbatim: “Definitely haven’t ran into putting on a dress. I mean you know, you, you have to have boundaries. You have to have limits that you refuse to cross. For me, I know what they are (his boundaries). They’ve yet to be challenged so, I don’t have to speak on that.” 

Kevin then followed that statement with disclosure of how that very day he was asked to dribble a basketball on a talk show and how he outright refused, because he would “look stupid.” Our brother finalized that question with saying that he is a brand and that he has to protect his brand and that he cannot do things that would diminish his brand.

When I heard him say this, I was confused as to what Kevin meant by “protecting” his brand, as his statement was very unclear. One would think that there is no “brand” more valuable or important to a person than their own self worth and dignity; that is, the principles and values upon which they stand and conduct their lives. It is clear that the industry “powers that be” were watching (and apparently listening to) Kevin in his early rising years because not very long after Kevin’s “boundaries” statements, those boundaries were in fact challenged; and Kevin did indeed capitulate. It would appear to be some form of retaliation for what amounted to Kevin’s defiance of the industry “powers” because Kevin Hart would, after his comments on the Black Tree TV interview, appear on Saturday Night Live (SNL) in a wig and wearing a dress. It seems then that Kevin’s remarks were seen by the industry controllers as a direct challenge to their power. 

To then contradict himself so quickly and on such huge platform as SNL, it was clear that this was a chastisement to Kevin that communicated this point: “Don’t you ever go on TV and say what you’re not going to do. You’ll do whatever we tell you to do!” and the same was to serve as a message to others of that time and a warning to those to come later (doesn’t that have a Qur’anic and Biblical familiarity?).

Not long after, he would in response to backlash because of how widely viewed the (2012) Jamaal Finkley interview was, post to twitter (April 2013) that he wore the dress because he thought the skit was funny, and that he is grown and his own boss. Kevin then returned to Black Tree TV and this time in the 2013 interview with Jamal Finkley completely reversed his previous position and justified it as putting being funny over his own personal beliefs, emphasizing that no one “made” him wear the dress and that people are not made to wear dresses, but rather that it is a matter of choice for each person individually.

But given the latest controversy over Kevin’s position regarding the gay issue, and how he was (this time) openly given an ultimatum, it is clear that Kevin’s “brand” does not align with his personal morals and dignity, and therefore that “protecting” his brand did not mean preserving its moral integrity in harmony with his personal principles as his 2012 answer to Jamaal Finkley implied.

I would also argue that if refusing to wear a dress, especially in lieu of having made statements as Kevin previously did, could ultimately result in being blackballed from the closed private entertainment industry, then how are people not forced to do so? I mean, if your choices are to wear a dress, get that hundred-thousand dollar check, and thereafter go on to prosper in the business, or defy them and return to the ghetto from which you came, and a normal nine to five job selling sneakers to survive like everyone else, is that a choice at all?

Kevin Hart would go on in his career to play several more roles that we understand to be detrimental to the image of the black male and indignant to us as a collective people; while very profitable for him as a business man. And to see Kevin on screen kissing another man, Dewayne “the Rock” Johnson, and being held and carried like an infant child after speaking on how much he does not want his son to be gay (and who’s more influential on a boy than his father?), shows us that what our brother Kevin spoke about “protecting” his brand actually meant preserving it; it’s marketability to be exact.

So how would the peoples of the world look upon what they know historically to be the original and greatest people on the earth, in captivity within another nation, and not only not making any collective attempt to free themselves, but also always being paraded before the world through the medium of entertainment media as ignorant criminals and as we see in hip-hop today, feminized, literally dressing up like little girls?

WHITE SUPREMACY AS AN ECONOMIC PLATFORM

It was Eddie Griffin who said, speaking in the context of the Dr. Bill Cosby tragedy, that no black men leaves this (the entertainment) industry unscathed; that no one (is allowed to) leaves this industry with a clean slate. And it was Professor Griff that remarked that the entertainment industry is built upon the pillars of white supremacy; that you have to pay (tribute) to play, and that black people and black men in particular, cannot and will not progress in the industry without compromising themselves, and or doing things in a manner that promotes and fortifies white supremacy as a social and economic platform.

I have no doubt that if Kevin Hart’s finances and career was not dependent upon an industry based on and operating within the predicate of white supremacy, he would have when this present issue of the Oscars surfaced, remained on the initial position that he instinctively took, one that he would not return to the issue again, because he already addressed it. I would go even further and say that Kevin Hart would have never apologized the first time for joking about not wanting his son to be gay, if it was not tantamount to career and thus, on the level that he has achieved, financial suicide. So he, like so many other black men, compromise their personal beliefs and values, in order to have fortune and fame. But does this really have to be the case?

Black people today, even the relatively small number of us in comparison to our overall population in America, has acquired more than enough education and wealth to accept and follow the plan and instruction given to us by the Hon. Elijah Muhammad. We have the tools and means needed to “Do for self” and the qualified professionals in all spheres of civilization to do so.

Because we are in a form of economic servitude and subjugation to mainstream America, and fear separating from our historical oppressors, we see even some of the most prominent of our people jailed and humiliated as in the cases of Bill Cosby and Kevin Hart, for financial “transgressions” like trying to own and control a mainstream media network in direct challenge and defiance of the “Old Guard” of white financial dominance; and for as small as openly speaking against a lifestyle that may be common among the executives in the entertainment industry, in the context of his own household.

We fail to understand and grasp the importance of the concept of laying a collective claim to that which we create, so because we as a people have no ownership of or control over industries that we uniquely invented, like hip-hop music, it's culture, and the industries related thereto and derived therefrom, we are stifled and relegated in our creative expression to only that which is acceptable and seen as non-threatening to the construct of economic white supremacy.

Try to imagine the jewels the world would have received from creative geniuses such as the late Legendary Rapper Tupac Shukar, had there been no consequences for his expressing how he really saw and experienced the world. But more importantly, why does this condition still exist, when we have several billionaires, and hundreds of extremely talented millionaire entertainers and athletes who have mastered these industries, as well as thousands of educated and skilled professionals and laborers with which we could literally build our own industries from the ground up? Has a fear of independence and open competition with white America, the haunting memories of Tulsa, Oklahoma's Black Wall Street, been scarred into our collective racial memory?

It matters not how glamorized and glorified your dependence may be, it doesn’t matter how fancy and shiny your monetary “chains” may look, economic dependence is servitude; and servitude is slavery! As long as we as a people depend on others for our sustenance and wealth rather than building industries for ourselves, we will never be free. Our Brother Kevin Hart says he is “his own boss” yet this “Boss” is not free to work and take certain jobs, if he does not appease the “powers that be” of his industry. This is the consequence when you are financed by your enemy.