Jump to content
JulyDiaz

EPISODE 193 — Into the Thunderdome

Recommended Posts

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

 

 

 

 

 

Yep, I think we know exactly who you are.

i'm a fancy fancy boy?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

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

Share this post


Link to post

Just going to post this then I'm done for good:

 

1. What Sun Kil Moon said was misogynist. That kind of language is demeaning to women in a variety of ways, from using bitch as an insult to the "you know you want it" implication.

 

2. Kozelek's intent was to be insulting or at least offensive. He wasn't making a subversive joke or making fun of misogyny. In my opinion, those are the only types of things that could excuse this language, and it's pretty clear his intent was to indeed be insulting/offensive/a dick in general. To use misogynistic language to do this is unacceptable. Period.

 

3. One cannot be an equal opportunity offender, as straight white males can not be demeaned in a similar manner to the way as Snapes was demeaned. This also applies to other "out of bounds" insults such as insulting someone's family, e.g. as someone who is not a parent I cannot be insulted/offended via verbal attacks on my children because I don't have any. Just like I, a straight, white, cisgender male cannot be demeaned in the way Kozelek demeaned Snapes.

 

4. Ultimately, it seems to come down to the fact that many don't want to change their language/behavior. Essentially, they don't want to have to deal with this hassle of change and being condemned for their words, as they don't feel personally offended by it and refuse to acknowledge the enormous number of people who are offended and who have a logical thought process that legitimizes that offense. This is ironic because Besser and Souprman are essentially trying to control and condemn the "PC police" for their behavior/words. The difference is, U.S. PC police are promoting respect and equality, while Besser; Souprman, and Kozelek just want to be able to make stupid "jokes", be insulting, and generally say whatever the fuck they want without consequences. I think the respect and equality of historically and currently disenfranchised groups is more important than the constant comfort of the systematically privileged.

 

5. All in all, this was a pretty upsetting episode to listen to. I have listened to every episode of i4H at least twice (most of them 3+ times), and I have also bought/watched as much of Besser's other stuff as I could in order to support him. The amount of happiness this show has brought to my life over the last few years is hard to quantify. Ever since those first listens, Besser has (had?) been a personal hero of mine. He always seemed to create the smartest, craziest, and simply funniest comedy, all while helping the careers of other great comedians by giving them exposure and generally showing the audience how awesome they were. He would also frequently "fight the good fight" and advocate for causes important to me, from marriage equality to gun control. But as a feminist/feminist ally/whatever you want to call solemn who believes in equality for women, it is very difficult for me to reconcile this episode with my previous view of Besser. It's going to be hard for me to listen to i4H again, simply because the views expressed in this episode are so infuriating/downright wrong and backwards. I'm sure future episodes will be funny, but, for me personally, listening to the show again would most likely be a reminder of prejudice and willful ignorance rather than the source of happiness it has always been. I'm not calling for a boycott or anything, all I'm saying is that I've been a huge fan of Besser and everything he's done, but this episode means listening to future episodes might not be a pleasant experience for me personally. So I guess you guys win, I won't be here to police your fun any more. If you want to call this over sensitive or whatever go ahead, because you're still missing the point entirely. So yell at me and promote prejudice, I won't be reading it any way, and my belief of gender equality is unshakable.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

I don't know about everyone else, Veegs, but the only thing I'm going to yell at you for is that giant goddamn wall of text. Paragraphs are your friend =)

Share this post


Link to post
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?

Yeah I remember getting a bit annoyed with Matt for being so extremely anti-Tebow

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
I don't know about everyone else, Veegs, but the only thing I'm going to yell at you for is that giant goddamn wall of text. Paragraphs are your friend =)

 

Well turned out I was lying when I said I wouldn't post again. Edited it. Happy with the appearance now? Either way I am actually done now.

Share this post


Link to post

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

 

edit> almost certainly wishful thinking.

White boys always get to walk away from the argument.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

White men always get to walk away from the argument.

i don't like Veegs decision to leave either...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
also how "offended" someone is by something isn't the barometer for whether or not it constitutes hate speech. the intentions behind it are. intentions are still important.

 

When talking specifically about hate speech, absolutely. That's how you separate someone genuinely bad and someone who's just an oblivious idiot. Again, my main contention was that the idea of, in terms of an insult, cunt being worse than bitch unequivocally, no matter the situation or context, doesn't hold water. And on that front I WILL. NOT. BENNND. No one can convince me or my 27 years of experience on this earth otherwise....

Share this post


Link to post

i don't like Veegs decision to leave either...

This fucking keyboard warrior here thinks he's so clever.

 

EDIT: Sorry for the name-calling here, I let my frustration get the best of me.

Share this post


Link to post

i just bristle at the idea that assigning blame, labeling everyone's actions, and shunning dissenters, is the top priority. understanding why things have gotten as bad as they are and making the correct reparations seems like a more positive direction to head in. the more we dig in to pockets of ideological isolation the worse things will get. understanding Kozelek's actions, like them or not, is pretty low on the list list of important issues concerning real crimes against equality.

 

here's what i wrote to Kate after the show;

 

i look at it like this Kozelek and Snapes behaved in the same disgusting manner. they disrespected each other's privacy and they made a public forum out of it. you could get into who did what first, but what's the point? assigning blame is the point. Here's where I get into why we need to understand what things mean. when Snapes called Kozelek's words misogynist she knew she was not telling a complete truth. as a writer she knows that misogyny is two-fold in definition. first being the hatred of or the discrimination against women. second is the learned and ingrained behaviors of misogyny. one could certainly make a valid argument that Kozelek's words are born out of an ingrained behavior learned from a misogynistic culture. but one could not determine Kozelek to be an outright misogynist, nor could they say his behavior was intentionally misogynistic, anything along those lines would be speculation. a negative word or comment toward a female is not explicitly malicious or misogynistic. "bitch" is not an analog to slanders on race or sexual preference. dick, prick, cock, pussy, bitch, motherfucker, cunt. this is the language we have inherited. these are words literally every person will use in company they are comfortable with. their use should not be taken as some kind of malevolent gender bias. the idea that Snapes, who is a professional journalist working for The Guardian & Pitchfork. who was savvy enough to get an email interview out of Kozelek, who was bold enough to defy his wishes and interview associates. the idea that she is somehow a total innocent, and a victim in this, is to me more demeaning to her then anything grumpy old Kozelek said. being a journalist is a tough tough racket, it is not for thin skinned, oblivious people. Snapes put herself in the story as much as Kozelek did. am I saying she's diabolical and totally to blame? no. i'm saying she's 50% to blame. but i think it's highly unethical of her to say he is an outright misogynist. her line about spewing his misogyny from; "...the cowardly remove of the stage." cowardly? remove? i don't understand how addressing 1200 people in room where someone is certainly recording constitutes either. i think she's a highly unethical journalist and i think Pitchfork and The Guardian are as well for pulling positive reviews of Sun Kil Moon's new record.

 

honestly i'm pissed at Kozelek, he's way smarter, and much more eloquent than this. he's a goddamn wordsmith! i think Kozelek should shut the fuck up and write something that gets to the heart of why these journalists upset him so much. what's so weird is it's not been brought up at all that Kozelek has lived in or around the Castro neighborhood in San Francisco for over 25 years, one the most diverse urban areas in the country. he's a well known liberal and advocate for like fucking everything. he's written so many beautiful words about all walks of life that are so explicit and heartfelt. it's interesting you mention the Iranian woman's plight. on the new record Kozelek has a song that starts with a verse, told in 1st person, about a fan who see's a show and the band wont play the songs he likes and the singer insults the audience, etc. it's clearly the result of hearing these same complaints about his shows. so he than spends the next several versus outlining horrible tragedies that have happened to people he has known and stories he's read about from around the world. he's basically saying - hey, too bad your band didn't play your song but people out here in world got real problems. i guess i feel like Laura Snapes created her own problem, and now she wants to use it to elevate her actions. Kozelek said a bunch of ludicrous shit no one would assume to be true. no one thinks Snapes wants to fuck Kozelek and have his baby. that's because he's a preformer, his actions are meant to be taken as such. but Snapes is a journalist. her words are meant to be read as not just opinion but fact. i'll say it again; her positioning herself as a victim should be more demeaning to her esteem and credibility than anything Mark Kozelek said. i therefore have to concede 1 point back back to Kozelek giving Snapes 51% of the blame.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

If one more mother fucker says 'this is my last post'......

'this is my last post'......

-Luke HENDERSON!

 

mother-fucker!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

This fucking keyboard warrior here thinks he's so clever.

This fucking keyboard warrior here thinks he's so clever.

 

sriously thoghgh lasst poosst

 

a whole shitload of balloons just fell from the ceiling.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

If you say or do misogynist stuff, you're a misogynist. If you're saying misogynist stuff just to be an asshole, being an asshole is more important to you than not being misogynist.

 

Misogyny doesn't have to be an active agenda to be real. It's not just rapists. It's not even just guys like Kozelek who think it's ok to call women bitches and sexually insult them in front of a crowd of people. It's also people who see what Kozelek did and don't call him out for it. What you put up with is what you stand for.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

If you say or do misogynist stuff, you're a misogynist. If you're saying misogynist stuff just to be an asshole, being an asshole is more important to you than not being misogynist.

 

Misogyny doesn't have to be an active agenda to be real. It's not just rapists. It's not even just guys like Kozelek who think it's ok to call women bitches and sexually insult them in front of a crowd of people. It's also people who see what Kozelek did and don't call him out for it. What you put up with is what you stand for.

really informative stuff.

 

last post really...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

What you put up with is what you stand for.

 

hang on a sec. understanding something and accepting what it is is not tantamount to agreeing with it.

 

edit>last post

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Laura Snapes created her own problem,

Oh if I had a nickel for every time a man called a woman a bitch and people said it was her own fault.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

Oh if I had a nickel for every time a man called a woman a bitch and people said it was her own fault.

would you have enough to realize that pulling that quote out of context from a paragraph stating i find them equally to blame is a nasty thing to do?

 

edit>sorry last post for realz guys

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

would you have enough to realize that pulling that quote out of context from a paragraph stating i find them equally to blame is a nasty thing to do?

 

edit>sorry last post for realz guys

 

case is closed jesus christ.

 

can't wait for review to start up again!!!! #findforrest

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

 

case is closed jesus christ.

 

can't wait for review to start up again!!!! #findforrest

#lastpost

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

would you have enough to realize that pulling that quote out of context from a paragraph stating i find them equally to blame is a nasty thing to do?

You literally said she's 51% to blame that's a controlling share.

Share this post


Link to post

You literally said she's 51% to blame that's a controlling share.

that was a joke pf. c'mon.

 

lllaaaasssttt

ppppoooosssstttttttttttttttt

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

When Michael Richards blew up and repeatedly yelled the n-word that time I didn't see yall come running to his defense that he was just saying it to be an asshole and the noisy audience members were asking for it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×