Yes, because it reflects very long-standing and deeply entrenched racist and sexist aspects of human history.
Nobody’s claiming it ought to be higher-status to be male or white than to be non-male or nonwhite. The point is simply that centuries of racism and sexism in majority-white societies and their colonies have left a de facto social legacy of higher status for men and whites. I’m a bit surprised you didn’t figure that out for yourself, actually.
Who did you think is getting special treatment on the basis of race, gender, or sexuality in the situation described in the OP?
There is no way that the word c*nt is as offense as the n word. The n word has a history of being used as a way to reinforce the debasement of an entire class of people. It’s associated with a very real history of some of the darkest chapters in our country’s history. And even if you want to argue that the c word has been used to debase women, in this context, it’s from one woman to another.
I think it was obviously tasteless and inappropriate, but at the same time, the entire Trump clan is using public office to enrich themselves on the taxpayer dime. They are the most nakedly corrupt first family in American history, so corrupt that they are going to essentially establish an entirely new baseline for how we judge corruption going forward. Ivanka Trump is not a victim in any sense, regardless of what language is used to describe her.
Samantha Bee should have called her “a feckless piece of ass”, since the POTUS is fine with that.
Cite: Trump to Howard Stern: You can call Ivanka a "piece of ass."
“Piece of ass” would have been totally fine, even if it’s Howard Stern calling her that, but, cunt, jeez, too far. I’m currently getting by knickers in a twist.
I also want to know whether octopus thinks Bee is a misogynist.
In a normal universe, a middle-age man referring to his own daughter as a piece of ass would probably be candidate for the perv hall of fame.
In a normal universe. Ours sometimes seems like a parallel one.
Since I’m looking at this through the lens of offense of using bigoted/rude personal language and not the specific of Planet of the Apes I think there is a double standard. Honestly, I don’t think either should be fired and I think people should have a thicker skin to this sort of stuff. I could be wrong though. It might actually be good for society to have these harsh reactions. I’m just not currently convinced.
I don’t think that using any sort of language necessarily labels you. Other than maybe as a potty mouth. Specific to Bee, I don’t know enough about her to say she is or isn’t. I assume she isn’t.
Did you raise any potty mouth objections when Trump was dropping f bombs to adoring crowds while campaigning?
Or is your sensitivity to bad language more selective perhaps? There were kids in those crowds, unlike in Sam B’s audience.
Yes. I was going to post links, but just do a google image search for “Hillary Cunt” and you’ll see for yourself what a hot steaming mess of pearl-clutching hypocrites all the alt-right snowflakes swooning over Samantha Bee’s comment are.
Your entire premise is based on the idea that norms around race and gender should be the same. Essentially equivocating.
Or dissembling. No one seems to buy into that premise and you haven’t provided any rationale as to why that should be so.
When Miller says the standard is to not be a racist, you pivot to mysoginy. That’s weak, and not even very good pivoting.
Since I didn’t vote for Trump with a large factor being his language I’d say your concern over my so-called “selective” behavior, while appreciated, is misplaced.
That’s your interpretation. Miller said in a post that in the abstract he did consider misogynistic behavior on par with racist but made the point he didn’t think Ms. Bee was actually being misogynistic.
Offense is inherently subjective, I can find misogynistic, transphobic, homophobic,etc. language to be as offensive as racist language even though you or others don’t. In my point of view, hate is hate. I don’t think language is hate. I’m not a fan, as should be known by now, of serious “consequences” for offensive expression. I think it’s counterproductive. But, I do know how I rate offensiveness and I think it’s a bit presumptuous for you to tell me what’s in my head. Equivocate? I don’t see a problem with that verb. But with dissemble you are basically calling me a liar and I don’t appreciate that.
The comment you responded to compared N and C words, likening them as both OK if used by the people they were (once, or most harmfully now) aimed at. But your comment seems to assume the N-word was originally at issue in comparing Barr and Bee, but Barr didn’t use the N-word, nobody did in this particular case. In the internet social media world of today there is always somebody going just a little further, then somebody else a little further than that, until it’s ridiculous, always. So sure, if Barr had simply tweeted: ‘Valerie Jarrett is a feckless N’, there’d still be somebody asking why she lost her show for it and Bee didn’t for saying ‘IT is a feckless C’. But it wouldn’t be as many people as are looking askance at the actual situation of a demeaning racial joke (not the N word) by Barr v a straight up vulgar insult* by Bee.
IMO the key (though people who don’t follow this advice up to now aren’t going to because I say so, I know that) is to consider that there simply is no fixed objective standard what is acceptable or not. When the culture was less fractured there was a strong consensus, that’s still not a fixed objective standard. Now that the culture is as fractured as it is, there are dueling consensus’s in the two main tribes, with a lot of people mainly outside either tribe viewing both statements are completely unacceptable (that would be me), and others saying ‘who cares’ about both. Try to understand that people you have to live in the same country with just do not view things the same way you do.
*I know Bee is supposedly a comedian (or is it still ‘comedienne’?) but in the whole era of politically conscious comedy of last 60+ yrs sometimes people just get up and make statements that aren’t jokes at all. This is an example, acceptable or not, true or not, no way is it a ‘joke’ to just call somebody a dirty name. Humor is subjective but I draw the line when people try to pass off pure shock (‘you didn’t think I’d dare say this did you?’) as humor. It’s not. Barr can reasonably claim she was trying to make a joke in a recognizable definition of ‘joke’. It doesn’t mean ABC has to indirectly underwrite that joke by maintaining a business relationship with Barr, nor does it mean Time Warner has to sever their relationship with Bee because part of her routines have no real element of humor. Some people want to see what Bee delivers, even the elements that are joke-free. TW can decide if they want to be associated with it.
I haven’t seen Bee’s show and I didn’t find her particularly funny in her TDS days (which - note - is not the same thing as saying she isn’t funny), but what bothers me about this particularly rant isn’t the offensive language but that it’s basically a bunch of cheap and easy shots. Wolff’s WHCD monologue was filled with sharp barbs but they were sharp because they were based on various uncomfortable but true insights. Calling Ivanka a “feckless cunt” is neither insightful nor funny, and I expect a professional comedian with her own show (and presumably some other writers) to do a little better than that, particularly given the wealth of material available with regard to the subject matter.
In short, I’m not offended but I’m disappointed. And if people want to boycott her show, they are welcome to go right ahead - but I suspect that, like me, those people probably weren’t watching it anyway.
If someone thinks there’s any level of equivalence between the two, it would explain why they’ve felt confused by what society has been going though for the past two or three decades. Octopus, does that describe you?
So calling someone a name based on their race is bad because of a long history of using bad names to demean people based on their race. Calling someone a name based on their gender is less bad because there is not a long history of using bad names to demean people based on their gender.
Hmmm.
Regards,
Shodan
Can’t tell if trolling or serious. Then again, you are making the argument that it’s impossible to punch down with a joke and that the social backgrounds of Barr and Jarrett absolves Barr of her racism, so you most likely are serious.
If you add a little bit more information to this, you can clearly see the difference.
No. You can’t tell me how I subjectively rate offensive speech or expression. That seems awfully presumptuous. Though I suppose being called confused is better than being called a liar.
Sexism is as bad as racism. In each case, people are being thought of and/or acted upon differently due to genetic factors outside their control. Now, certain specific acts are worse than others, regardless of mitigating thoughts or other factors.
Being compared to an ape or other primate, and all so-called races have been enslaved and have enslaved at some point, can be as bad as being called a cunt depending on audience. I can call you an ape in the pit, for example, if I called you a cunt in the pit I’d risk a warning. So, here on this particular message board, ape-naming is the lesser offense.
In society, each person has to make that subjective decision themselves. Even if we did racial slur vs sexist slur, context and audience still matter. Listen to some rap music. Nigger/a/_ can be a sign of affection whereas bitch is quite often very misogynistic or homophobic in connotation. Now, I’m not telling you how you should perceive it or society how society should perceive it but I’m saying that the ones “dissembling“ are the ones who claim that there is a universal and objective interpretation.
Well for one, there’s the fact that Bee’s comments could hardly be called sexism; she used a very vulgar word. As to the question of how they’re not equivalent, Jacquernagy explained it very well earlier:
Ah, the appeal to Jacquernagy fallacy?
Thankfully, we have a couple posters on the SDMB to objectively define what and how differing expressions should offend.
I’m fairly certain there is a universal and objective interpretation of a white person calling or comparing a black person to an ape. And that interpretation is “racist”. I’m white, so I can understand and agree with it.
A woman calling another woman a “cunt”? I’m not a woman, so I don’t know if a universal and objective interpretation exists or what it is if it does.
Same with a black person calling another black person “nigga” in a rap song. I’m not black, so I don’t know if the universal and objective interpretation of this exists.
And I’m fairly certain that if you called a poster who was known to be black an “ape” in the Pit, it would draw a warning.