General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPlease stop equating Maher with Fat Ass
Maher's show has a well known and well established comedic context. Bill Maher is a comedian. He has done stand up. Rush is not a comedian and has never done stand up. There is no pre-established comedic context to Rush's show.
If comedians like Maher can't say whatever they want, what do you do to comedians like Lisa Lampanelli whose whole act is based on bigotry and offending people in the most vile way?
There is a difference between comedy and political commentary. Comedy is not the place to fight the bigotry battle because it's intent is always more ambiguous. Leave it alone or there will be no comedy at all.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
JSnuffy
(374 posts)Michael Richards famous N@#$@ rant shouldn't have had any backlash?
After all, he is a famous comedian.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander and Maher is just as much of an ass.
Shankapotomus
(4,840 posts)and I respectfully submit that, since it happened under and during a totally comedic context, there was enormous room for paranoia and ambiguity. It was during his stand up routine, for gods sake. There is no way to judge whether he meant it. In fact, because it was said during a stand up routine, one would think people would conclude it was said as pure sarcasm.
Plus there was a way to confirm Michael Richard's real feelings - simply by waiting until his show was over and asking him outside of a comedic context - instead of jumping the gun, assuming the worst and punishing him before he's even finished his act.
I hope that doesn't sound like an extreme defense. I'm trying to tip toe lightly here. I just think there are better, less ambiguous situations to fight the bigotry battle.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)Mahr does cross over into serious political commentary. Comparing Lisa Lampanelli to Bill Mahr is just as wrong as comparing Mahr to Rush.
Because Mahr does try to be taken seriously on some political issues he doesn't get a pass on those types of comments. Lampanelli does.
Shankapotomus
(4,840 posts)into political commentary and he can and has been held accountable when he does. But the issue is: When does he cross over?
Calling Palin the c word was so over the top for Maher as the pro feminist person we know him to be (he has defended women on countless occassions) that there is little doubt the c comment, (which we all know was directed at the fact that Palin is a dumb conservative rather than her being a woman) was attempt at a comedic jab.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)he was pro prostitution for most of his life and he a very proud womanizer.
He is a liberal and tends to come down on the liberal side of issues, but not always and his libertarian streak sometimes gets in the way.
I say again, if he is going to cross over and try to be taken seriously on political issues then he doesn't get a pass.
redgreenandblue
(2,120 posts)There are several feminists who would disagree.
IMO feminism is about enabling women to live self-determined lives, independent of men and with equal status as men. "pro prostitution" men and womanizers are not necessarily antithetical to that.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)to a man's will throughout all of human history, and beyond.
I strongly disagree with your belief that one can be pro prostitution and pro feminist.
You can be pro sex worker, in so much as you are trying to improve the lives of these women as much as possible. That isn't the same as supporting the institution which subjugates them.
redgreenandblue
(2,120 posts)Are many prostitutes subjects? Absolutely.
Some however are doing it because they want to. I fail to see how it can be in the interest of feminism to dictate to these women what choices they may or may not make.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)and your libertarian approach to this is exactly the approach Mahr had for most of his life. He later came to understand that far more harm is done to far more women by allowing prostitution than is done by not allowing prostitution.
There is no perfect answer to this but IMO the libertarian view is, as always, over simplistic and dead wrong.
redgreenandblue
(2,120 posts)Why does everything have to be "one size fits all" in America?
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)Just how do you expect to be able to do that?
redgreenandblue
(2,120 posts)Let a woman go through a complicated registration/examination process before she becomes "legal" to work as a prostitute. Assume anyone who didn't go through this process is being forced.
Shankapotomus
(4,840 posts)You can't be pro feminist and pro prostitution. On that point, I agree, Maher should meet resistance.
But not for being a comedian. Comedians say crazy outrageous things. If they didn't what would we laugh at?
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Pro feminist.... hahahahahahahhaha!
Cunt is a gender slur. Facts is facts.
Shankapotomus
(4,840 posts)part wrong. Scratch that part.
TeamsterDem
(1,173 posts)as would many people who say it without regard for gender. I don't want to turn this into a back-alley type discussion by providing examples, but I've used that word to men and about inanimate objects. That's not a point of pride, mind you - using foul language isn't exactly on my resume - but the point remains that even a non-sexist uses that word without necessarily referencing the gender of the target.
I don't think it's a "conscious movement," per se, but if one listens to jokes which fly back and forth between groups of friends, one notes that men now jokingly say things like "you dick" (to a woman) and a woman might refer to the guy with the C word. It's stripping the gender context from the words, and provided they're not said intentionally to reference the other person's gender, I think a rigid unwillingness to recognize that not everyone intends any harm with all of their commentary is as ridiculous as those who do in fact intend to offend a gender with some stereotypical or other kind of gender slur.
Bill Maher once called Sarah Palin a "bimbo." As shocked and offended as I was when I heard it I let him explain. When he did he explained that George W. Bush was also a "bimbo" in his eyes, explaining that in his view bimbo didn't have just the guttural sense most assumed, and he then offered his own interpretation of the word's true meaning.
And with respect to prostitution, feminism is the equality of the sexes. Provided a woman is not forced or otherwise coerced into the world's oldest profession - and provided she's of legal age - I think they should have the right to CHOOSE to do that. My own moral code is that I'd never use a prostitute nor encourage that lifestyle to any woman I might know. But I'd similarly not encourage a woman to have an abortion, yet I feel it's her right to choose that. So I'm not sure how Maher's stance on prostitution is any different than a pro-choice advocate holding that view.
I don't think Bill Maher is the nation's greatest champion of women's rights. But if one actually listens to him it's hard to make him out to be anywhere close to Limbaugh. It's such an absurd comparison, frankly, that one must wonder about those who make it.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Same with DU. And the fact that some Brits regularly use the word does not mean that it's use is not sexist.
As for groups of friends joking, I'll let August Pollock explain fabricated belief to you...
http://www.someguywithawebsite.com/blogarchive/week_2007_04_08.html#002117
Bill Maher not only called Palin a bimbo, he called her a dumb twat and, a few days later, a cunt. He may have his own interpretation of each of those words "true meaning" but communicating clearly relies on commonly recognized meanings. That most assumed a different meaning reveals that most were right and Maher's own interpretation needs to be revised.
(I'm a bit baffled as to why you brought prostitution and abortion into this conversation.)
TeamsterDem
(1,173 posts)Gotcha. If someone says the C word they simply must be a sexist. Got it. No matter how many women use the word it's still sexist. No matter how many men use it absent any sexist motivation or even application, the world according to you is that the word - just its existence and usage - is an inherent assault upon feminism.
The problem with that myopia is that, of course, words like the C word has multiple usages. I've no idea where you spend your time, but among we commoners such language is frequently heard in reference usually to some person who's seen as very offensive by the speaker. I've heard the word used to describe men and women, and I've also heard it used by both sexes. That intrinsically means that it's not sexist UNLESS it's used to offend a particular gender. It seems that the own quote you offer as support for your argument seems to defeat it: the quote points out the absurdity of stripping the context, nature, and audience from the criticism of the word's usage, something you yourself then do whilst offering that quote as somehow supportive. Speaking of being baffled ...
With respect to Maher, I haven't the time or the inclination to begin teaching comedy, irony, and exaggeration to you in terms of how they relate to communication, but suffice to say that Bill Maher's subsequent statements regarding his usage of those inflammatory terms and how he applies them equally to men necessarily eviscerate the idea that he's using the terms out of a sexist motivation. If you're so offended by that word I certainly hope you don't often venture out into public, as it's not exactly the most foreign of terms utilized ... but to your surprise, I imagine, it usually only means an individual for whom the speaker has profound contempt, and its more common usage is gender-neutral. Much like the P word which - in my experience - is most often applied to men despite it literally meaning a female part, your outrage is misguided and a result of kneejerking instead of understanding.
Respecting prostitution, it was brought up previously in this thread. You could easily unbaffle yourself by reading a bit more. 
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)I don't.
Peace out.
nanabugg
(2,198 posts)Palin is no college student exercising her freedom of speech to Congress. Palin is a very public figure who seeks the limelight and therefore has to take the heat (including some disparaging comments) or get the hell out of the kitchen!
cali
(114,904 posts)i like the guy despite his treating women like a neanderthal and despite liking him i can't engage in the mental gymnastics that would enable me to condone his calling any woman what he called palin it's not as bad as what rush did but it ain't good.
Shankapotomus
(4,840 posts)I'm starting to become flexible on this issue. You guys are wearing me down. Lol
rfranklin
(13,200 posts)And has been lauded in the past for helping them win elections. I don't think that Maher has any such influence over voters.
ProdigalJunkMail
(12,017 posts)is ridiculous. it was in ridiculous in my thread and it is even more ridiculous to take that post and make it an OP. he is plainly a political commentator on his show Real Time...
sP
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)ProdigalJunkMail
(12,017 posts)presidency of the united states a cunt? it doesn't matter who he is...it matters what he said. just because someone utters an epithet, be it racial or gender-based, in a quiet room it doesn't make them any less of an ass nor any less worthy of reprimand.
sP
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)She didn't. And that misrepresentation defines your hard work here.
Feel free to take issue with Maher's choice of words, I do as well. That does not mean that the content of what was said was equal, nor that the intention was the same, nor that the targets were of equal standing.
The main issue with what Rush said was that he lied while he slandered. He made specific untrue allegations toward an innocent American and against her parents as well. His target not a famous person, his slanders slur filled and his claims as to what she said utterly false. He made things up and called her names for it.
Trust me, the courts will explain to you and to Rush the gaping differences in that which you wish to portray as equal things.
The whole of your issue with Maher is 'a comic uses nasty language' as if he was the first. Here is a link to some Sarah Silverman material to discuss. Perhaps you need to alert the media that she and Maher are such nasty kidz with the language and all!
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0422528/quotes
Shankapotomus
(4,840 posts)We can agree to disagree here. But I will say Maher is the comedic host of a show that mixes comedy with politics. It's not all politics. He even does short comedic skits on the show, further evidence Maher's role has a strong comedic purpose on the show. I regard him as sort of like the ringmaster who has special powers and can move in and out of comedy and commentary and, like any stand up show, if some people don't get the joke, tough.
Limbaugh does not purport to be a comedian. Maher is a PROFESSIONAL comedian.
Lastly, it is clear Rush was being serious with his latest comments because he went in to details, almost examining the situation.
A comedian throwing the c word out there (as any derogatory word), with all due respect to the ladies (and I am sensitive about this under any other context) is practically a comedic time honored tradition.
abowsh
(45 posts)He calls women sluts too.
mac56
(17,816 posts)nm
GoCubsGo
(34,804 posts)And, he never has used such language again. He didn't keep it up for days on end, like Rush is doing. I am so sick of this "liberals do it, too" equivocation. No liberal has come anywhere near this kind of garbage.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)he even stopped doing his TV show even though he said it on his radio show.
If we use this as the standard then Rush should be off the air for at least a year, just for what he has said about Ms. Fluke.
That is if you equate attacking a collage student with a public figure who has her own talk show with which to strike back. For the sake of argument, I am willing to do that.
Response to Motown_Johnny (Reply #18)
Post removed
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)wow
abowsh
(45 posts)Almost all based on race, but I just remember what a wise philosopher once said:
"stick and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me."
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)Hmmm......
Quantess
(27,630 posts)Something like that. Please correct me if I got it wrong.
Ed Shultz didn't mean literally a slut sexually. It was more akin to calling someone a corporate whore, which doesn't mean in a sexual way.
trumad
(41,692 posts)Shankapotomus
(4,840 posts)for what he says and I know Ed would agree.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)for that which she praised Reagan for doing.
So saying 'he calls women sluts' states that he called other women sluts. Can you support your claim? I recall that he used that slur once, apologized, was punished for it, expressed much regret for the word and I do not recall that he repeated it, as you claim, nor that he has a history of slanders toward women as Rush does, nor slanders toward gay people as Rush does, nor toward African Americans as Rush does. Rush called Chelsea Clinton, age 12, the White House Dog. He mocked Michael J Fox's illness and said he was faking his Parkinson's symptoms.
Ed's quote, for the record:
"“President Obama is going to be visiting Joplin, Mo., on Sunday but you know what they’re talking about, like this right-wing slut, what’s her name?, Laura Ingraham?” he said on his radio show. “Yeah, she’s a talk slut. You see, she was, back in the day, praising President Reagan when he was drinking a beer overseas. But now that Obama’s doing it, they’re working him over.”
Note the word is rotten, the content is accurate, political, and pointed at a political professional for her professional ethics.
Here is what Rush said, again for the record:
"What does it say about the college co-ed Susan Fluke [sic] who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex -- what does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She's having so much sex she can't afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex."
Now you can explain how and why you see the two statements as saying the same thing. Feel free. Can not wait. Here's more Rush:
""A Georgetown coed told Nancy Pelosi's hearing that the women in her law school program are having so much sex they're going broke, so you and I should have to pay for their birth control. So what would you call that? I called it what it is. So, I'm offering a compromise today: I will buy all of the women at Georgetown University as much aspirin to put between their knees as they want. ... So Miss Fluke and the rest of you feminazis, here's the deal. If we are going to pay for your contraceptives and thus pay for you to have sex, we want something. We want you to post the videos online so we can all watch."
mac56
(17,816 posts)I grow weary of the Limbaugh shills who have flooded this forum in recent days, trying to make the case that there is NO DIFFERENCE between El Rushbo and Maher.
That dog won't hunt. The whole shtick has grown tiresome.
KharmaTrain
(31,706 posts)It's using one asshat's stupidity to justify another just because it makes your asshat look less asshatty. It always cheapens a discussion of the core issue and rarely makes one side look better than the other.
Mahrer's remarks about Mooselini were wrong...and you can't cover it up in the fact he's a comedian. It was over-the-top and he could have used other verbage to get the same punchline out. I can point to far more of Mahrer's uses of comedy and satire that did hit the mark (see New Rules) that didn't use words intended to shock and offend. Using words that people find offensive in order to inflame or ridicule is a cheap way out...
Ian David
(69,059 posts)Maher may say some insensitive things, but he works to actually make things better for women and minorities and all of us.
Dorian Gray
(13,849 posts)asses. Rush and Maher. Shock.
Iggo
(49,796 posts)When Maher was on the public airwaves, far fewer people than are now screaming for Rush's head called for Maher's, and they got it on a silver platter.
Compare how many people are pissed about Rush and what's NOT happening to him with how few people were pissed at Maher and what DID happen to him.
You can compare them, but you can't equate them.
Finally, look at the timing of the people who all of a sudden want to make this about Bill Maher when it's about Rush Fucking Limbaugh, then adjust your ignore lists accordingly.
modem77
(191 posts)RevStPatrick
(2,208 posts)Calling people names is calling people names.
If someone calls you an ass, it doesn't matter if it's done with a smile or with venom.
Someone still called you an ass, and you probably didn't like being called an ass.
Look, I love Bill Maher's show and his comedy, I can't stand the fact that I have to share a planet with that Limbaugh character.
But on "our side" over here, people have been contorting themselves and the truth for the past few days in an effort to be some kind of purity squad. We call people names, we love doing it, and we are very clever at it. If we want purity, then we have to be pure, and your point is that being pure would be no damn fun at all...
Shankapotomus
(4,840 posts)and then what happens to comedy?
bahrbearian
(13,466 posts)
jsmirman
(4,507 posts)To my ear, there is a very different thing taking place when someone throws out two *general* slurs (things that clearly should never be said, but things that are used as a general nasty comment directed at saying you dislike the entirety of a person) and what Rush did.
What Rush did is a calculated use - what Rush did is come up with the term that, for his purposes, he ties to the specific conduct/position of Sandra Fluke. For Rush, speaking out on a woman's desire for contraceptive coverage = being a slut; getting coverage for contraception purposes = being a prostitute.
I doubt that I am explaining this perfectly, but I see a significant difference. Rush made the attacks as though they were a logical corollary to Sandra Fluke's testimony. Maher, as ill-considered as his remarks were, made his remarks as a general, clumsy, indulgence in a schoolyard insult. This may seem to be dancing on the head of a pin, but I see a difference.
JoeyT
(6,785 posts)the slurs aren't even the worst of what Rush said. Making it just about the slurs plays into the right wing nonsense of "If I don't use the N word I'm not a racist no matter what else I say".
The comedy defense fails on multiple levels: The main one being that there are quite a few right wing comedians, they are dicks, and they're still racists, misogynists, and homophobic. And they're exactly as funny as you'd expect someone that puts themselves forward as a conservative comedian to be.
When in doubt, ask yourself which one is more likely to be encouraging their listeners to send people death threats. No slurs needed.
WillowTree
(5,348 posts)Men need to find more civilized ways to express their disdain for women with whom they disagree. What Mahr said isn't one whit more acceptible because "he's a comedian" or "she's a public figure" or "I detest everything she stands for".
I hold no double standard here. Either Limbaugh was wrong to say what he said, and Mahr (and Schultz and Olbermann, both of whom I've also heard quoted today making similarly contexted comments about conservative women) are also wrong, or none of them are wrong.
And so it doesn't go out of context, women should also find more civil ways of referring to men whom they dislike.......or it should be a free-for-all for men and women and the Left and the Right etc. You may want it both ways, but that rarely works out. Sorry.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)and he has to pretend that Rush actually apologized....
https://twitter.com/#!/billmaher/status/177186344697733120
Hate to defend #RushLimbaugh but he apologized, liberals looking bad not accepting. Also hate intimidation by sponsor pullout
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)nah. when you hate women, .... it consistently shows thru
leave rush alone
Initech
(108,206 posts)
applegrove
(131,334 posts)misinformes and misleads his listeners so that they vote against their own economic self interest and vote for what will only help the 1%. Big difference. BIG!
just1voice
(1,362 posts)Fat Ass is a blowhard propaganda mouthpiece for gullible morons, nothing the "big fat idiot" ever says matters to anyone except media whores and those who chose to listen to them.
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)and Rush is his.
And last time I checked, Lisa Lampanelli wasn't asking anyone to take her stand up seriously. Maher is a pundit more than a comedian, and gets a free pass way too often.
EmeraldCityGrl
(4,310 posts)when elected Democrats too worried about losing the next
election remained silent.
The Democratic tent seems to be getting smaller with every passing
month.
mikeytherat
(6,829 posts)Woman haters are woman haters, and I don't give a shit about the context.
mikey_the_rat
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)TheKentuckian
(26,314 posts)essentially being mindless and willfully so. Abdication of judgement is seldom sane behavior, nor is exchanging a brain sor a switch.
When you proclaim you don't care about context you are asserting that you will react rather than think.
NewJeffCT
(56,848 posts)However, Rush kept pounding away at Sandra Fluke non-stop for 3 or 4 days. At 3 hours a day, that is 9-12 hours. And, since many other talk show hosts take their lead from Rush, you can raise the number of attacks on her exponentially. Though, I don't know of others who called her a slut & a prostitute and demanded that she post sex tapes online, just the fact that she was a target of so many attacks has to be intimidating for a college student.
Maher's line was that - one line about a public figure. Maher's show is on the air for one hour a week. Rush's show is on the air almost as much in one week as Maher's is on the entire year.
got root
(425 posts)Not sure what these folks are 'thinking'