Samantha Bee proves hypocrisy on firing people for offensive jokes

a reply to: redmage

Yep.

That why I prefer to not look at group identity, and instead look at individuals.

And why I dont get offended almost ever.

And why on the very rare times I do, I just change the channel, or walk away, etc.

Pretty simple world view actually.

a reply to: redmage

I missed where they all pretended to be black?

No, wait ... they were all men who went after women.

originally posted by: ketsuko
I missed where they all pretended to be black?

Just like I missed where Roseanne and Samantha Bee pretended to be black. It's irrelevant!

The point was that the notion of dems somehow being safe or off-limits in Hollywood due to simply being "one of theirs" is absurd today. They've shown time and time again that they will gladly throw one of their own under the bus, and have been cannibalizing themselves for over a year now for any perceived "ism".

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: redmage

Yep.

That why I prefer to not look at group identity, and instead look at individuals.

I've found that to be a great philosophy as well.

Identity politics is absolutely absurd, but it has done wonders for the 1%ers in keeping the masses divided and distracted.

originally posted by: redmage

originally posted by: ketsuko
The only thing saving Kimmel is that he's one of theirs.

"One of theirs" saves him, eh? How about the fact that it wasn't "blackface".

Im gonna concede this argument. It technically wasn't blackface. He just painted HIS WHOLE BODY BLACK.

So if you don't do the original 1910 shoe polish blackface and just paint your body/face black and talk like someone with a sub 70 IQ its ok..

Gotcha

Look I don't watch Samantha Bee, I didn't watch Rossanne, I don't watch Bill Maher, I probably won't watch the Chris Rock special on Netflix. I only watched Kathy Griffith because she was really good at making Anderson Cooper uncomfortable. LOL But I guess lot's of people could do that. I don't defend any of them. Distasteful is distasteful. They do have a right to say it and we have a right not to like it and protest or boycott it.

Having said all that, I think Rossanne's was racist and Samantha's was just offensive. There's a big difference.

but even having said that. I wouldn't care if Samantha got fired and I think Rossane deserved to be fired. But there's a a difference between being a racist and being offensive and blurting out bad words to sound cool and funny.

a reply to: o0oTOPCATo0o

She doesnt look black to me, but I also dont look Native Armerican enough for some. Who cares.

The eyebrows you guys, its all in the eyebrows

Sorta OT but:

I wonder why stuff like this dont get the blowback Rosanne got? hmmmm A whole video calling out a specific sex and race of people. Just curious? Would the whole network have been boycotted and shut down if that video replaced the word white with black and spoke about Chicago crime statistics and fatherless homes statistics?

Why yes it would, yes it would have batman. YOU cant say the right and left media are the same when you know damn well the right could not have made a similar video of the opposite race without all hell on Earth breaking loose. Media/Holywood leans heavily left, to say they don't get away with more stuff is BS.

Either none of it is Ok or all of it is all Ok. The double standards simply need to STOP!!!!!

a reply to: ker2010

They all need to get laid and smoke a j....

a reply to: redmage

Because on the battlefield of "wokeness" and intersectionality, those men ceased to be "one of theirs." For #metoo, it became a he/she thing as much or more than a right/left thing.

The leftist forces of PC may have started this march under one banner, but they are also prone to eating their own from time to time too.

Even Joy Reid finally had to apologize today for this latest flap.

In case you haven't noticed, this sort of thing this intersectional circle jerk crap is more like a religion to its adherents than anything else. They like to burn heretics, and today's hero is prone to become tomorrow's zero as soon as it's convenient for the howling mob.



You'll notice that #metoo caught those men you listed, but Bill Clinton is still protected? He's still politically useful, and they still have hopes for Hillary.

And how do the Roman Polanskis of the world continue to be defended? And what about the people like Whoopi Goldberg who brush off what he did as not being "rape, rape"? There are numerous examples of people saying and doing horrible things who continue to either be ignored or defended outright by the same people who are busy burning Roseanne at the stake today.

a reply to: amazing

They're splitting hairs because it doesn't look good and they know it.

originally posted by: ketsuko
In case you haven't noticed, this sort of thing this intersectional circle jerk crap is more like a religion to its adherents than anything else. They like to burn heretics, and today's hero is prone to become tomorrow's zero as soon as it's convenient for the howling mob.

In case you haven't noticed, that's basically the point I've been making this whole time. The notion that anyone is "safe" for being a Dem in Hollywood just doesn't hold water any longer. Bee isn't safe for being "one of them" (a Hollywood Dem) she's getting a pass for trash talking an "identity peer" which appears to be just fine in the intersectional circle jerk bible.

originally posted by: redmage

originally posted by: ketsuko
In case you haven't noticed, this sort of thing this intersectional circle jerk crap is more like a religion to its adherents than anything else. They like to burn heretics, and today's hero is prone to become tomorrow's zero as soon as it's convenient for the howling mob.

In case you haven't noticed, that's basically the point I've been making this whole time. The notion that anyone is "safe" for being a Dem in Hollywood just doesn't hold water any longer. Bee isn't safe for being "one of them" (a Hollywood Dem) she's getting a pass for trash talking an "identity peer" which appear to be just fine in the intersectional circle jerk bible.

No. Ivanka is not an "identity peer." She has been disavowed for her familial connections. Conservative women have likewise been disavowed. Black conservatives have been disavowed. Conservative views or independent thought get you disavowed -- look at Kanye or Roseanne who are neither one conservative at all, but both of whom spoke in favor of Trump.

In the case of Ivanka, it's actually pretty stupid. She's really fairly progressive, and they'd be smart to court her. Instead, they hate her father so much, they crap on her too.

But, you know, sins of the father and all that ...

a reply to: ketsuko

They're both white heterosexually-married women. That equals "Identity peers". The key to identity politics really is in the identity half of the term. Ivanka and Roseanne's progressive political tendencies are of no relevance when it comes to identity politics.

Had Ivanka not been white, not been heterosexual, or had she been transgender I have no doubt that Bee's show would be cancelled by now.

originally posted by: redmage
a reply to: ketsuko

They're both white heterosexually-married women. That equals "Identity peers". The key to identity politics really is in the identity half of the term. Ivanka and Roseanne's progressive political tendencies are of no relevance when it comes to identity politics.

No. Political ideology does have quite a bit to do with it.

We disagree because we think they're wrong. They hate because they think we're evil.

Conservatism is evil because it doesn't really buy into the identity politics to begin with. Recall how I said many are only pointing this out because of the perceived injustice and not because we feel offended?

I don't feel offended by Bee's comment because I don't identify as a woman in the political identity sense. Had I, I'd have been out marching with my pink pussy hat on, voting like my lady parts (c*** in Ivanka's case it seems) depended on it.

In order to play the game, you have to buy into all the issues you are told women really, really care about. I simply don't.

But even if I did, there was no place for me there because I am conservative. They made that plain and continue to make it plain. It's "wrongthink" and "against my best interests" as a woman, so I am not allowed to be in that group. That is supposed to make me feel bad, but as I don't play that game, I don't care.

But if the group finds out that I am conservative, they are free to treat me as vilely as they choose, and no one will stand up for me as a woman because I am clearly not one.

originally posted by: ketsuko
Conservatism is evil because it doesn't really buy into the identity politics to begin with.

Yet time and time again "intersectional circle jerkers" will gladly stand up to protect and defend Muslim women and Muslim men, and you'd be hard pressed to find any more conservative group than that. Devout Muslims make run of the mill U.S. conservatives look like flaming liberals. The key to identity politics really is in the identity half of the term, and political tendencies really are of little to no relevance when it comes to identity politics.

Had Ivanka not been white, not been heterosexual, or had she been transgender I have no doubt that Bee's show would be cancelled already, but like it or not Bee and Ivanka are "identity peers" in their book.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: blueman12
a reply to: MotherMayEye

I honestly don't see how c!nt ties into rape. I've never gotten the idea of rape when someone said, "c!nt". Just like I don't picture rape if someone calls someone a d!ck or as$hole.

Rape is certainly a problem and there's no doubt that women have been oppressed by men throughput history. However, I i just don't see the connection between that and "c!nt". Maybe I'm wrong, but just my perception.

I honestly don't see how 'Planet of the Apes' ties into racism. I have never gotten the idea of racism when I watch the Planet of the Apes movies, just like I don't picture racism when I hear 'Wizard of Oz' or 'Jurassic Park.'

Racism is certainly a problem and there's no doubt that black people have been oppressed by white people. However, I just don't see the connection between that and "Planet of the Apes". Maybe I'm wrong, but just my perception.

Apes are below humans on the so called evolutionary scale, and so calling a black person that is relegating them to be lower or inferior from human. People have compared white people and other races to apes before as well, but it is usually the media or someone looking for personal PR exposure to come along and plaster these comparisons up for the world to see which is the real crime, rather than just letting it remain a joke. This is the same as tossing a clawed kitty cat on someone to watch it claw the heck out of them.

What the MSM does with these kinds of memes is where the real crime is. They are that clawed cat, but they throw themselves on their chosen "victim" so they can make themselves appear holy and pure while watching people destroy themselves.

Planet of the Apes:

Complex sociological themes run through this science-fiction classic about three astronauts marooned on a futuristic planet where apes rule and humans are slaves.

I don't know where you are getting that the apes in that movie are inferior to humans. You see what you want to see.

It appears you totally missed my entire explanation. It has nothing to do with what I see. It isn't apes in the movie at all, it is apes in any form being compared to African Americans that is the crime and why people throw a fit. Thanks for trying though.

a reply to: ketsuko

Is it simply vulgar?

Yes. It's vulgar, not racist.

So if comparing a black person to a monkey is

Is racist.

Period.

Both are dehumanizing.

Yep, but one is vulgar. The other is racist. That's the difference.

It's really not that hard to understand.

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

Eh, she said she thought she was white. I did, too. So, I give her the benefit of the doubt based on her record.

I'm just not a fan of the cynical, unforgiving world that so many SJWs and strict partisans are building.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Grambler


I don't see how ABC is responsible for Samantha Bee's show, who works for TBS.

You missed the point of the entire post. It really doesn't have anything to do with the Network they world for, it's the hypocrisy in Hollywood that he is alluding to.

a reply to: Liquesence

One is unquestionably misogynistic and the other can be viewed as racist.