Introduction

To me, the term “problematic fave” is a bit redundant, especially when in reference to a celebrity. Almost everyone and everything is “problematic” in some way, or has been in the past. Generally, I see people use the phrase when trying to justify liking a harmful celebrity’s media output.

However, it does serve a purpose in my personal vocabulary. If something is obviously problematic, but not egregiously so, then I might consider it a problematic fave.

Read on to discover a few of my favorite yet flawed pieces of media—things I would only recommend along with a few caveats/warnings. Instead of discussing problematic people or communities, I’ve tried to focus on media or art that has its issues without considering the creator (e.g., panic! at the disco or Taylor Jenkins Reid) or industry (e.g., K-pop or reality TV). The question of whether art can exist without context is a whole other warehouse full of cans of worms…

Lastly, before I get into this short and incomplete list, here’s my reminder to enjoy whatever you enjoy as long as you’re not hurting anyone! We’ve got to take advantage of the good moments whenever they appear.

Psych, TV series (2006-2014)

What It’s About: Psych is a TV series that follows Shawn Spencer as he uses his extraordinary observing and deductive skills to work as a fake psychic detective. He starts an agency with his best friend and pharmaceutical salesman, Gus, and often goes to his similarly skilled dad for advice. Every episode starts with a flashback to Shawn’s childhood in which he learns a lesson from his dad that becomes relevant in some way to the episode’s story.

Why It’s Problematic:By nature of being a detective show, Psych is inherently pro-cop and without much nuance. Sure, there are a few instances of “dirty cops” getting their comeuppance, but Shawn’s dad, Henry, is so pro-cop that being in law enforcement is part of his identity and even parenting style. There’s also the issue of Detective Lassiter, who is the pro-gun, anti-climate change, right wing, sometimes offensively un-PC head detective. In early seasons, he is often very sexist, as well.

Along with these are the usual bigotries of the aughts: fatphobia and diet culture, transphobia, homophobia, micro- and macro-aggressions against BIPOC, and ableism (especially when considering neurodivergent people). There are two particular episodes I regularly skip when rewatching that have to do with transphobia, ableism and unhealthy boundary-pushing.   

Why I Love It:First of all, I love a Sherlock Holmes retelling that’s well done. The source material is more obvious in early seasons but it’s clear in Shawn’s hyper-observance and otherworldly deductive skills. He’s both suave and socially awkward at the same time, like Holmes, but he is much funnier.

This show is hilarious! It has as many pop culture references as Gilmore Girls (another problematic fave of mine), and that’s saying something. I love rewatching the show and realizing I understand a few more of the references; it feels like I’m in on a joke with the characters. Plus, this show has a Black lead (and Gus is inarguably the most relatable character) and two women in high-ranking positions in law enforcement.

Why I Give It a Pass:While his character development is not perfect by any means, Detective Lassiter does become more likeable and accepting as the series goes on—he marries a rehabilitated felon (i.e., loses his black and white view of criminality and innocence) and ends up accepting his mother’s girlfriend as part of his family. There are a couple episodes that directly tackle Shawn’s commitment and behavioral issues, as well.

This is a small thing, but whenever people assume Shawn and Gus are dating and not just friends, it’s often played off in a funny way that doesn’t belittle gay relationships (e.g., a former high school classmate assuming they’re dating and Shawn saying that the reason they don’t date is because Gus was voted “Most Likely to Succeed,” not that they’re two guys). This is, after all, a comedy show, so it leans into humor more often than hard-hitting issues. Sometimes, that’s just what I need.

Gravitation by Maki Murakami, manga series (1995-2000)

What It’s About: Gravitation is a yaoi (or “boys love”) manga aboutShuichi Shindou and his best friend Hiroshi, who want to blow up in the electronic music scene in Japan. As they gain popularity, their band, Bad Luck, develops rivalries with two bands, one of which is well-established and an inspiration to the members of Bad Luck. While they navigate their music career, Shuichi falls in love with romance novelist Eiri Yuki, who is standoffish and secretive. They become lovers, which causes problems for both of their careers and public-facing personas.

Why It’s Problematic: The main problem I have with this story is the obvious one: the age gap between the main couple. One is a boy just out of high school who is emotionally immature and trying to make his dream come true. The other is a rich womanizer in his mid-twenties who already has an established career as a romance novelist. There is an element of emotional abuse in the relationship, and mild sexual abuse as well. There’s even a storyline in which a rival band has Shuichi sexually assaulted just to try to ruin his reputation. The story also tends to infantilize Shuichi, even in the art style, because he is extremely expressive and loves unconditionally.

Beyond all of the problematic characters and character dynamics, there’s also the matter of the blatant homophobia and outdated vocabulary (e.g., using the r word) that comes from the 1990s Japan setting. Shuichi and Yuki don’t consider themselves gay or bisexual despite their relationship; they’re just two “straight” guys who happened to fall in love with a man. There are even instances of Shuichi calling himself Yuki’s “wife” and using other heteronormative vocabulary to describe their relationship.

Why I Love It: The mangaka (the creator/author/illustrator) includes little notes at the beginning of each chapter about her process, certain decisions, and what readers have said to her about the manga in the past. I am always interested in creators’ processes, especially because I find it difficult to articulate my own. But mostly I was drawn into the story because it involves a young indie band in the music industry, quirky characters who aren’t afraid to be themselves, found family dynamics, and a grumpy-sunshine relationship between two people in very different parts of the public eye. It’s a recipe for a Ryn fave that just happens to have a few unsavory ingredients I could do without.  

Why I Give It a Pass: To be honest, this is the one I’m most nervous to write about because I only recently began reading this manga. Like a couple months ago recently. Absolutely no personal nostalgia involved. I randomly bought the first two volumes and, despite all of its flaws, found myself enjoying the story. I mostly gave this a pass because I just have fun reading it.

In the mangaka’s little chapter notes, she talks about the problematic aspects of characters and her concerns when writing certain storylines, and while I wish these discussions were a bit longer than a couple sentences, it takes a lot of guts to give commentary on your own art that’s already been sent out into the world. It makes me feel a little better knowing that the mangaka admits to just going with her whims while creating this manga and isn’t afraid to criticize her past decisions even while standing by her work.

Monk, TV series (2002-2009)

What It’s About: Adrian Monk has a severe case of OCD which was exacerbated by his wife’s violent and unsolved murder. With the help of his assistant (Sharona and then Natalie) and his experience as a former police officer, he uses his hyper-observance skills to help the San Francisco police department with tricky murder investigations.

Why It’s Problematic: A lot of my dislikes of Monk will be similar to those I mentioned about Psych. There is the pro-cop propaganda, although I would argue that Captain Stottlemeyer is much worse than Lassiter. Stottlemeyer does not become less violent, and in fact often loses his temper and betrays his friends. If he weren’t someone Adrian Monk respected, his character would easily be a dirty cop that gets investigated for brutality. There is one episode that deals with an investigation into an alcoholic cop, but this one ends in that cop being reinstated as a detective with no consequences… Much more like real life, huh?

The fatphobia is also a lot more obvious in this show. One of the main villains is a morbidly obese man called “Dale the Whale.” Dale is a terrible person, just very scummy, but him being fat has nothing to do with that. It’s just a classic “fat = greed” simplification. There’s also a lot of heteronormativity shoved in your face in this show, more so even than other 2000s shows. Monk is often told he should move on from his deceased wife and get a new partner despite his obvious PTSD and lack of interest in a new relationship.

Why I Love It: You don’t see a lot of sensitive OCD representation in mainstream media. People make fun of Monk’s compulsions, and his case of OCD is particularly extreme, but the show goes about it in a pretty nuanced way. Monk sees a therapist. He has moments of despair and moments of joy. His catch phrase when discussing the heightened abilities tied to his OCD is, “It’s a gift… and a curse.” He’s able to see that his brain might sometimes work against him but that it isn’t all bad to think differently than others. In addition, this is also a Sherlock Holmes retelling with a twist, plus Monk’s assistant Sharona is hilarious and challenges him in (mostly) healthy ways.

Why I Give It a Pass: The aforementioned OCD rep is a big part of why I give this show a pass. While it can be dismissive of other types of issues and definitely has ableist characters, the fact that the main character has such severe OCD and is still beloved by so many people gives me hope for a future in which I can see the “gift” in my neurodivergence rather than just the “curse.”

High Fidelity by Nick Hornby, novel (1995)

What It’s About: Rob owns and runs a subpar record store with the help of his quirky yet unreliable employees. Rob’s long-term girlfriend breaks up with him because he seems to be stuck, so he throws himself into his mediocre life and pursues a relationship with a singer before realizing he needs to take a good, hard look at what he actually wants out of life.

Why It’s Problematic: Most of Nick Hornby’s fiction work is centered on “weaponized male incompetence,” a phrase the wonderful YouTuber Luxeria used once in a video, and High Fidelity is no different. The main character is a white, cishet, 30-something man in a retail job who doesn’t try too hard in his relationship but is still mad when his partner leaves. Rob looks down on anyone who doesn’t have the same music opinions and knowledge he does and refuses to “grow up” and take responsibility for himself. I’m by no means saying that his working class and arts-centered job means he isn’t a “real” adult, nor am I saying that he should be in a relationship that requires him to change or settle down, but his lack of self-awareness is what makes this all problematic. Additionally, the women in this book are 2D characters only there to advance Rob’s story, which is clearly how Rob sees them.

Why I Love It: Listen, Jess Mariano from Gilmore Girls mentions this book in one of my favorite episodes, so that automatically gives it a boost. Plus, I kind of love reading about mediocre 30-somethings. I’ve always believed my 30s will be my best decade, but it’s still interesting to learn about people living boring yet abnormal lives in their 30s who don’t have all their shit together. I don’t plan on ever having a “regular” 9-5 job, and reading about other people who don’t have this goal but still manage to carve out a place for themselves is delightful, even if it is written in a satirical way. And the musical aspects of the book obviously make me enjoy it more, too.

Why I Give It a Pass: There’s nothing egregiously wrong with this story, at least that I remember. Sure, no one in this book is particularly careful about how they speak to or about each other, nor do they really try to make the world better, but they also don’t actively try to make things worse. There’s also an aspect to this book in which Rob does some soul-searching, albeit very surface level.

Also, if you’re not interested in reading the book, I still recommend the Hulu series of the same name, in which Rob is played by Zoë Kravitz and the story is updated for the 2020s.

Make Happy by Bo Burnham, comedy special (2016)

What It’s About: Make Happy is a recording of Bo Burnham performing his self-written comedy routine at New York’s Capitol Theatre. The Netflix special includes not just the performance, but also a pre-recorded intro and outro and several meta video-making jokes. Much of Burnham’s comedy is music-based and satirizes celebrity culture.

Why It’s Problematic: Obviously, Bo Burnham’s comedy has been problematic in the past (as evidenced by his song “Problematic” in his most recent special Inside… or any foray into his early years on YouTube). However, Make Happy is the one in particular I would consider a favorite of mine. The most blatant thing I have a problem with is that, while Burnham is critiquing parts of the rap music industry, there’s a moment in which the backing track uses the n word, even though it’s clear that the voice is just a distorted version of Burnham’s voice. Even for a joke, that feels totally wrong to me. There is also a joke in which he tricks the audience into saying the n word, as well.

Burnham tends to use the word “f*ggot” as an insult, which isn’t horribly problematic in my opinion because it seems to be a word that has been used to belittle him whether or not he’s part of the queer community. I’m all for reclaiming words that have been used against you. The special includes some pedophilia jokes and an entire song called “Kill Yourself,” though I’ll discuss the nuance of this song in the “Why I Give It a Pass” section.

Why I Love It: Most simply, Bo Burnham is hilarious. He often pokes fun at parasocial relationships in his comedy, which I (of course) am absolutely here for. Burnham also has the type of comedy that gets, to quote the man himself, “introspective.” He writes about being a performer and being a human, meshing these two things together in a way that is both funny and #deep. Particularly, the last two comedic songs in this special are my favorites—the Kanye West-style “rant/song” about burritos, Pringle can sizes, and being overwhelmed by life; and the piano ballad in which he asks us all, “Are you happy?” while unable to answer the question for himself. Basically, it’s the existentialism, musical comedy, honest humor, and humorous honesty.

Why I Give It a Pass: As his comedy career progressed, Burnham trended toward more obvious and meaningful satire rather than just satire for the sake of shocking people. For example, “Kill Yourself” is not actually about killing yourself; it’s about the way artists often take on the emotional state of their fans out of obligation or face-saving. In Make Happy, he states this very clearly even though it may “ruin” the joke. There’s something about a famous and/or influential person admitting to mistakes or insecurities, baring that human side of themselves, that makes me more forgiving when considering their work.

Conclusion

Well, there you have it!

This is by no means an exhaustive list. There are problematic things that I am too unobjective to talk about without doing a ton of soul searching I don’t feel like doing outside of therapy. The lack of music and childhood favorite books is a testament to this. Some things in life are simply things I want to enjoy without too much hard thought or emotion; I’m willing (and able) to give myself that grace with a few things I enjoy.

Though this discussion of liking “problematic” media barely scratches the surface of the conversation that needs to be had, I hope it’s a start. We’d have to dive into the idea of “guilty pleasures” and the “cancel culture” phenomenon to even break through to the real meat of the matter.

The reason I wanted to write this post is because part of me always feels the need to justify anything I do or like or say, but I also wanted to make the point that none of us are perfect, and neither is the media we consume. When you are an imperfect person in an imperfect world full of other imperfect people, there’s a dearth of perfectly sensitive and thoughtful art out there. Maybe even a lack. But if we try to share our best selves and ideas, and we are open to criticism and emotion, we might be able to get closer to an abundance of conscientious art and creators.

-Ryn PB