Jump to content
đź”’ The Earwolf Forums are closed Read more... Ă—

Noah

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    31

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Noah

  7. Posted

    On the word "bitch" and why its more denigrating than calling someone a "cunt" "cocksucker" or "prick" from the section "THE PROBLEMS WITH “BITCH” from a very good analysis http://www.jmu.edu/s...al_Analysis.pdf

     

     

    Yet, in classrooms and on college campuses, we have frequently heard students use bitch as a generic noun. “Life is a bitch, and then you die” has been around for a while, but more recently we have overheard students saying, for example, “That test was a real bitch!” The test, or any other object being described this way, is presumably difficult, or, at the very least, annoying. If the student believes that she or he has not done well, the expression distances the speaker from responsibility—it is not poor preparation on the part of the student, or that s/he isn’t smart, but that the test (the “bitch”) was unfair or more difficult than it should have been. If the student does well on the test, s/he can feel proud of having aced “a bitch of a test.” The expression draws on the meaning of “bitch” as a pejorative term for women. Hypothetically, the pejoratives associated with men and masculinity—“dick” or “dickhead”—could be used in the same manner. But we have never heard a student say “That test was a real dick.” Nor have we heard a student refer to a test by the generic “jerk” or “asshole.”

     

    The test that is a “bitch” is feminized, placed in a subordinate relationship with he (or she) who exerts control and, thus, is positioned as masculine. In that sense, the “bitch” is not a true generic, but equivalent to calling a woman “a bitch.”

     

    In every day language, "bitch" connotes someone or something that is annoying, difficult, subordinate, and should be dominated.

    • Like 4

  8. Posted

    Also souprman, it was great to hear you call in and have my prediction from the last thread confirmed:

     

    Very easy to say that from a position of privilege. You might as well have written "I'm straight white guy and words like faggot, nigger, and bitch don't hurt MY feelings, why should they hurt anyone elses?"

     

    that's funny stuff kids. you don't know me.

     

    Yep, I think we know exactly who you are.

    • Like 3

  9. Posted

    don't bother replying. that's my last post on this thread.

     

    edit> almost certainly wishful thinking.

    Sorry but I'm going to continue to argue about this, you don't get to end the debate. If you want walk away that is totally fine, but you said that about 4 times in the last thread but continued to come back and call everyone who disagreed with child so I have a feeling you will be back.

    • Like 1

  10. Posted

    Props to everyone who called in, that takes guts especially to represent an opposing viewpoint. That being said, I was disappointed with the weak arguments put forward by the anti-Sun Kil Moon camp.

     

    Like OneNoteSong posted above me, no one argued with souprman and Matt over their portrayal of Snapes' contact with Kozelek as harassing and annoying. In reality, all she did was ask for an in person interview, get politely denied, then follow up with some interview questions via email and interviews of Mark's peers. Somehow in Matt and souprman's world, that qualifies as harassment and justifies anything Mark wants to say about her. In the end, that doesn't even matter because even if she was harassing, it doesn't justify abusing her for being a women.

     

    Matt and souprman argued that bitch wasn't a misogynistic term. Credit to illuminatedwax for trying to draw the connection to the word "faggot," I would have gone further to explain why bitch is an offensive term and how it is used to dismiss and denigrate any women who tries to stand up for herself or demand fair treatment. Matt would probably have denied the word's power and connotation, but I think that someone more persuasive than me could make the point.

     

    I'm at work so I can't take the time to write out my full thoughts right now, I hope PF Changs or Veegs can fill in.

    • Like 8

  11. Posted

    Haven't finished listening to the episode yet, but I just want to bring up something that irked me when listening to old episodes:

     

    Matt believes we can't criticize Sun Kil Moon for the misogynistic/asshole stuff that he says because he is just playing into his persona of a grumpy asshole. At the same time, Matt gets supremely pissed off by Tim Tebow for talking about God, Christ, and his religion openly. However, isn't Tebow's persona that of an ultra-religious Christian evangelist? Matt how do you justify your criticism of Tebow when he is just playing into his persona the same way Sun Kil Moon does?

    • Like 4

  13. Posted

    the power people are so willing give to words to sway their emotions. if you know your own mind you needn't be a proxy for the possible offense of others.

    Very easy to say that from a position of privilege. You might as well have written "I'm straight white guy and words like faggot, nigger, and bitch don't hurt MY feelings, why should they hurt anyone elses?"

    • Like 6

  14. Posted

    Regarding the "equal opportunity offender" defense, I think it's total bullshit. Making fun of white guys is NOT the same as saying something misogynistic or racist. The difference is that white men in America do not face discrimination at any significant level. They dominant the world socially, economically, and politically. Jokes about how white people can't dance, or how much they like Whole Foods, or how dorky they dress does not impact their employment opportunities, social standing, or political power. Meanwhile, when you make jokes about women or black people, you are making fun of a group that already is getting shit on by society. You are supporting behavior and sterotypes that contribute to discrimination.

     

    In Mark Kozelek's case, saying "I’m the best person you never met and one day, if you ever meet me, you’ll probably want to have my baby" and singing she "totally wants to fuck me" implies that female journalists are unable to do their job without getting distracted and wanted to fuck their subject. It is degrading, and contributes to the notion that female journalists shouldn't be taken seriously.

    • Like 6

  15. Posted

    Loved most of the episode, but as is forum tradition, I have come to argue about Matt's rant near the end of the episode.

     

    I really cannot understand how on earth Matt considers "but it's just their personality! He was just joking! You can't get mad at someone if it's just their personality!" a valid defense for saying something disgusting or hateful, as if that makes it immune from criticism. Every time a prominent personality says something shitty, do we just have to ignore it because "it's just the way they are?" A Nobel Laureate just resigned over some fucking terrible comments he made about female scientists in a speech. Imagine a scientist that works with him comes out and says "That's just his personality! He was raised in a time where women did not work alongside men, so its not his fault He was just kidding!" Does that make what he said OK?

     

    We have heard you on this very podcast kick someone out of a show for calling another audience member a faggot. According to your logic, that was unfair. For all we know, he was just kidding! It was just his personality! In real life he loves gay people and treats them equally! He called them a faggot as a joke!

     

    What Mark did to a women WHO JUST WANTED TO INTERVIEW HIM OVER EMAIL was clearly over the line. Singing "she totally wants to fuck me” and “get in line, bitch" on stage and saying things like "I’m the best person you never met and one day, if you ever meet me, you’ll probably want to have my baby" is scumbag misogynist behavior. No one is preventing you from continuing to support him and no one is stopping Mark from saying it. However, that does not give you the right to tell other people that they can't be offended and that they don't have the right to criticize him for saying that shit.

    • Like 5

  17. Posted

    I like when Matt pulls back the curtain and gives and insider look into the world of improv and its politics, I just wish that somewhere in this episode Matt talked a little more about what this guy has been saying about UCB. I respect Matt's decision to preserve this guys privacy, cause fans of this show would probably harass the shit out of the him, but it kind of frustrated me that no one explained how this guy's style of improv differs from what they teach at UCB.

    • Like 3

  25. Posted

    Listening to this episode right now, I wish that Matt got one of the guys defending Monica Lewinski in the last thread rather than some random guy on Twitter. This dude is making terrible arguments, he can barely state his point. This is not a fair representation of the argument why Monica Lewinski does not deserve the criticism she has received.

     

    This has been a reoccurring problem with Case Closed. Some random person is plucked from Twitter then they come on the air and it turns out that they can't defend their point to save their lives.

    The people in the other thread were making much better arguments! Matt, can you bring someone onto case closed that actually knows what they are talking about??

    • Like 3
×