Matt Damon is confusing. He might have built his personal reputation around being a down-to-earth everyman who uses his celebrity status to help out people less fortunate than himself, but in recent years, he’s more closely resembled an over-privileged smug dude with an empathy problem.

Damon’s confounding behavior has been present since the start of his career. Remember how heart-warming it was when he and Ben Affleck won the Academy Award for Best Screenplay for Good Will Hunting, while their mothers watched from the audience? The BFFs were adorable that night, and the world wished them well. About five minutes later though, Damon appeared on the Oprah Winfrey Show and promptly dumped his co-star and girlfriend of over a year, Minnie Driver, on the air. Driver, in an extraordinarily restrained move, called the incident “fantastically inappropriate.”

The cruel incident was the first indication the world got that Matt Damon might be a giant douchelord, but everyone kind of forgot about it, thanks to his outspoken liberalism, charity work ( is a cause particularly close to his heart), and undeniable penchant for comedy:

In recent years though, it’s the insensitive nonsense that pops out of his mouth that’s overshadowing the good stuff. There was the September 2015 interview with The Guardian, in which Damon suggested that gay actors should keep their sexuality quiet, lest they lose roles. “I think you’re a better actor the less people know about you, period,” he said. “And sexuality is a huge part of that. Whether you’re straight or gay, people shouldn’t know anything about your sexuality because that’s one of the mysteries that you should be able to play.”

The quote was positioned almost directly beneath a photo of Damon and his wife on the red carpet, captioned “Family man: with his wife, Luciana, whom he met while filming in Miami in 2003.” The message was clear: Matt Damon feels just fine about taking his heterosexual relationship to red carpets all over the world (no mystery required!), but gay people shouldn’t do the same thing in case they lose roles. Damon made this statement two years after playing a gay man himself in Behind the Candelabra, despite his many years committed to being an open heterosexual. The hypocrisy was jaw-dropping.

Later, appearing on Ellen and attempting to clarify his Guardian statements, Damon managed to make things worse. He told DeGeneres that, post-Good Will Hunting, people had asked if he and Ben Affleck were gay. He stated: “I’m not going to throw my friends under the bus who are gay, and act like it’s some kind of disease.” In what way is confirming your sexuality the same as treating homosexuality as an illness? And why does Damon only care about his gay friends, rather than the wider LGBTQ community?

The problem with Damon is that, one minute he is outspoken in ways that are totally right on (when Ben Carson said that the Presidential office was no place for a Muslim, Damon publicly called the statement “horrible,” “offensive,” and “wrong”), the next he is seemingly incapable of recognizing his own privilege.

The very same month as that disastrous Guardian interview, during an episode of Project Greenlight, Damon talked over and interrupted successful producer, Effie Brown, to tell her that diversity isn’t needed behind the camera, as long as people of color show up on screen. He did so in the middle of Brown suggesting that racial and gender-based insensitivity onscreen can occur when there are only white men in charge of production. Because: OBVIOUSLY.

Prepare to cringe:

After social media blew up in response, Damon apologized (“I believe deeply that there need to be more diverse filmmakers making movies”), but proved to have missed the point almost entirely when, a year later, he starred in The Great Wall — a movie set in China that still, somehow, managed to have white people dominating the story. Constance Wu, of Fresh Off the Boat, said on Twitter: “We have to stop perpetuating the racist myth that [only a] white man can save the world.” David Sims accurately noted in The Atlantic that the movie put “a white American actor at the center of another culture’s story.”

Damon defended his role with yet another tone-deaf apology, by saying: “I didn’t take a role away from a Chinese actor… it wasn’t altered because of me in any way… Although it was developed for commercial purposes, I felt there was room for me to play and put many elements of Chinese culture into it.” Hard not to roll your eyes at that last part.

Also in 2015, Damon displayed some insidious misogyny when he blamed Jennifer Lopez for Ben Affleck’s image problem during their much-publicized 2002-2004 relationship. “It was like he was being cast in a role, that he was a talentless kind of meathead, with his whole relationship with Jennifer Lopez,” Damon told the Hollywood Reporter. “He just got cast as this person that he wasn’t… It was painful to be his friend, because it wasn’t fair, you know?”

It’s extremely difficult to side with Damon’s version of events, given the fact that Affleck’s on-camera behavior during that period including sexually assaulting an MTV host while TV cameras rolled, and repeatedly talking about the breasts of a Canadian TV host, also while on the air. During that last interview, Affleck also impersonated someone with Cerebral Palsy and used the word “retarded.” Affleck’s behavior was clearly odious, without any input from J-Lo whatsoever. It seems like it’s easier for Damon to blame a woman than it is to question his best friend’s conduct.

The most recent Damon-related screw up concerns ex-New York Times journalist, Sharon Waxman, who made claims that a 2004 article she worked on to expose Harvey Weinstein’s alleged penchant for sexual harassment and assault was buried after Russell Crowe and Matt Damon called the newspaper to defend their producer pal.

Damon strongly denied Waxman’s claims, telling Deadline: “My recollection was that it was about a one minute phone call. Harvey had called me and said, they’re writing a story about Fabrizio [Lombardo, of Miramax]… and it’s really negative. Can you just call and tell her what your experience with Fabrizio was. So I did, and that’s what I said to her.”

Damon also offered his thoughts on the allegations against Weinstein, saying: “Everybody’s saying we all knew. That’s not true. This type of predation happens behind closed doors, and out of public view.”

Then: “Even before I was famous, I didn’t abide this kind of behavior. But now, as the father of four daughters, this is the kind of sexual predation that keeps me up at night.” Because, apparently, it is impossible to understand the true horror of sexual assault until you’ve co-created some female children.

The more questionable elements of Matt Damon’s worldview just keep emerging. Even when he’s trying to apologize, the actor frequently just digs himself deeper into a hole. As it stands in 2017, no matter how much we once loved him, it feels an awful lot like he is the epitome of the liberal nice guy who still has a hard time understanding the viewpoints of anyone who isn’t white, male, and heterosexual — and it’s simply too hard to ignore anymore.

Even When Matt Damon is Apologizing, He Gets it Wrong 11 October,2017Rae Alexandra

  • Curious

    I don’t understand why celebrities get free passes. Has anyone challenged Tom Cruise, a big proponent of Scientology – a group that condemns homosexuality?

  • tom_merle

    This is a remarkably atrocious article. Her interpretations of Damon’s actions are simply wrong. Time to enter the real world and leave pop behind.

  • Danny

    Why does this article not clarify that Waxman ALSO denied Waxman’s own claims! She has clarified that Damon’s statement is in fact CORRECT, and that he knew nothing of the Weinstein allegations and did not think he was squashing a story. THIS article is why we simply cannot trust things like this article. Incredibly slanted.

  • “Even before I was famous, I didn’t abide this kind of behavior. But now, as the father of four daughters, this is the kind of sexual predation that keeps me up at night.” Because, apparently, it is impossible to understand the true horror of sexual assault until you’ve co-created some female children.”

    What a nasty paragraph. That is not what he said at all, and it’s right there in his own quote. Before he was famous he ‘didn’t abide this kind of behavior’. It’s simply that having daughters to worry about brings it closer to home and thus “keeps (him) up at night”. Really cheap shot writing; the writer should be ashamed.
    This too: “And why does Damon only care about his gay friends, rather than the wider LGBTQ community?” What kind of a stretch is that?
    I am no fan of Damon’s behavior; I agree with the writer for the most part. But she really needs to tone down on her own personal contempt for her subject if she wants to appear even remotely trustworthy as a writer.

  • 50ftqueenie18

    The racial elements of this article are ridiculous. If blacks want to make films, FUND YOUR OWN! Stop expecting white people to pay for you to direct and star in your films.
    Damon in that awful Chinese film….if he weren’t in it, it would not have been seen outside China or some Asian communities in the western world. If it’s a film designed to appeal to a western audience, expect a few westerners to appear.
    The leftwing female who wrote this nonsense wouldn’t hesitate in portraying ethnic British culture with a black African or Asian face. In fact they do it all the time in the UK, taking native British identity and history and culture and giving it to some third world migrant community.
    So keep your hypocritical bull to yourself, sweetheart.
    P.S. Is it any wonder people like Trump when his opposition are weeds like Damon and Alexandra?

  • Lauren

    Wow. I’m no fan of Damon and abhor most of his ridiculous comments, but this is just lousy journalism. I expect better from KQED. Does this writer even have an editor? It looks like she is freelance, but I’m concerned this even made it onto the site. Was there any review? What is KQED’s review process? I can’t find your S&P–is it published anywhere on the site?
    As many of the commenters have correctly pointed out, the author is clearly unable to be a disinterested party, a requirement for any good journalist. This isn’t an op-ed. Again, KQED, I expect much more from you. And you need to issue a correction, not only for the facts the author got wrong and/or omitted, but also for the clear bias and personal slant that oozes from this piece.

  • ReelLadyEve

    Very disappointed in KQED for posting this poorly conceived and executed attempt at a “take down”? I’m no fan of Damon’s but, as others have noted, this is clearly biased – actually venomous – “journalism,” and I’m less a fan of that.

  • Scott Smith

    The article seems spot on. When Damon isn’t scripted or has to react to a situation, you finally encounter his real egotistical self. The writer also forgot one very important piece of the misogynistic puzzle, Casey Affleck. Read up on Casey’s sexual assault encounters as well as him settling out of court. The pattern continues along with Damon protecting and going to bat for him. Dig more, I bet you find a treasure trove of bad behavior.

  • Misty Cohen

    Damon is an entitled d-bag actor and so is this tabloid style article on him. When did KQED become the National Enquirer?


Rae Alexandra

Rae Alexandra is On Call Producer for KQED Pop. Born and raised in Wales, she started her career writing for Britain’s biggest music magazines. After moving to California, she became a regular contributor to both SF Weekly and New York’s Village Voice. She regularly ruins your favorite ‘80s movies at, and can be found on Twitter @raemondjjjj.

Sponsored by

Become a KQED sponsor