Comments on: Not Funny

By: Still Crazy After All These Years at deschutesdemocrats.org

Still Crazy After All These Years at deschutesdemocrats.org — Fri, 05 Oct 2007 14:12:47 +0000

[...] Over the long years I’ve observed some consistent traits among righties. One is that they sincerely believe most people think the way they do, even when polls say otherwise. In fact, “most people agree with me” is a common fallback debate tactic. Some have an almost frantic need to believe they belong to a majority, possibly because it makes them feel powerful. Erich Fromm wrote that people who find autonomy isolating and bewildering often will submerge themselves in an authoritarian group. Such people often have a strong sado-masochistic streak, Fromm said. They derive pleasure both from submission to a higher authority and from aggressively dominating people who fall below them in the social/power strata. “Humor” is often a socially acceptable form of hate speech used to keep less desirable people in their place. [...]

By: The Mahablog » Still Crazy After All These Years

The Mahablog » Still Crazy After All These Years — Fri, 05 Oct 2007 13:28:41 +0000

By: The Mahablog » What Is It About Righties and Hate?

The Mahablog » What Is It About Righties and Hate? — Sat, 05 May 2007 13:13:40 +0000

[...] And Dave is probably right about the zombies. If Senator Obama is the nominee, I expect to see a return of the overt, full-frontal racism that was mostly banished from mass media in the 1960s. Not that racist hate speech ever went away, of course. But the prime-time bigots figured out how to cloak racist hate speech as “humor” or as “unbiased commentary,” often accompanied by much winking and nudging. If in the fall of 2008 presidential nominee Obama is cruising to an apparent victory, I ’spect a whole lot o’ desperate bigots will drop the pretense and say, plainly, what they really mean. It could get ugly. [...]

By: The Mahablog » Acts of Unkindness

The Mahablog » Acts of Unkindness — Fri, 13 Apr 2007 13:39:54 +0000

[...] That’s why I’m glad to see the recent backlash against Don Imus. About time. Racist and sexist rhetoric does real damage and an sometimes escalate into something worse. Hatemongers will push their hostility further and further, rhetorically and physically, until they are stopped. And in my experience the one thing that really does make them pause is overwhelming public disapproval. If they get a clue that the society they live in is not, in fact, winking and nodding at them that their bigotry is acceptable, the bigots will at least be more circumspect about their bigotry. [...]

By: maha

maha — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 14:20:50 +0000

WereBear — If you think the cookbooks were sexist, you should have seen the pre-Dr.Spock child care manuals from the 1930s and 1940s. My mother had one that is lost now; I wish I still had it to show to people. It was medieval.

By: WereBear

WereBear — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 14:16:22 +0000

I was born in the late fifties, and the cookbook I learned from was my mother’s wedding present, a Betty Crocker comprehensive, everything from kitchen organization to packing cookies for the brave fellows overseas. It had lots of pictures and showed you stuff like the lost art of “creaming” butter and sugar when making a cake.

It also did not have a single woman’s name in it. Everyone who were generously sharing their recipes and entertaining tips were “Mrs. Lionel Uptight” and “Mrs. Edward Dull.”

It also had little tips for getting through your day. I vividly remember a cute illustration, where a hardworking housewife was “taking a moment for herself” by looking at a squirrel on a branch. Which, of course, she was supposed to “share with her family later.”

I became a heckuva baker, if I do say so myself.

But the cookbook also made me a very early feminist.

By: The Mahablog » Who You Callin’ “Conservative”?

The Mahablog » Who You Callin’ “Conservative”? — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 14:04:32 +0000

[...] One quick follow-up to yesterday’s “Not Funny” post — today all manner of people are scrambling to disown Don Imus and blame his reign of (rhetorical) terror on their ideological enemies. For example, rightie Brian Maloney says some people (identified as “key leftists”) are calling Imus a “conservative.” Maloney writes, “That’s despite his endorsement of John Kerry in the 2004 presidential race and past tirades against the Bush Administration from a decidedly leftist perspective.” Maloney doesn’t explain what he means by “decidedly leftist perspective.” [...]

By: Gordon

Gordon — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 13:27:55 +0000

There’s a difference between words used as art, and words used as opinion. Sometimes the line between art and opinion is hard to find, or different people find it in different places. But basically, on one side you have irony, and on the other misanthropism. Nobody mistakes Johnny Cash’s “I shot a man in Reno just to watch him die” for misanthropism; I’ve never heard anyone upset about Led Zepplin’s song about being a glorious slaughtering Viking. I personally put Tarantino’s flicks firmly in the irony category.

Some argue that Imus was just using words that rap music put in the lexicon. Some argue that rappers just let the sun shine on attitudes that are already there. They both have a point, but I think the Paris riots indicate we should give the rappers some credit (in France, everyone is *by definition* equal, so there can’t possibly be any discrimination).

My son asked me why anyone would watch Imus. The only thing I could come up with was say you really wished you’d gotten plastered the night before, you could still get that hung-over feeling.

By: tontocal

tontocal — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 02:03:31 +0000

Barbara,

I disagree. It’s kinda like the threat of global warming. I can get all verklempt about it (and I do sometimes) but if I’m watching coverage of it on my plasma tv, it’s kinda pointless, isn’t it? My point is that I certainly don’t think that TBogg meant like the Rolling Stones meant it. While subtle, the epithet is meant to cast aspersions on her as both black and female. We can say she’s arguably the friggin’ lousiest Secretary of State in American history without having to demean her sex or her race.

One of the reasons I read your blog every morning, and have for a couple of years now is that I come to you for reasoned debate and many times, excellent editorial style viewpoints.

Again, the point of my last comment was that name calling demeans us all.

By: maha

maha — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 01:47:17 +0000

tontocal — Where was the ad hominem slur? It can be argued that the “brown sugar” part was sexist/racist — although I think there’s room to argue it isn’t — but the rest of what TBogg wrote was perfectly justifiable. Condi got “what she deserved” because of what she has done, not because she is a black woman.