Anita Sarkeesian tackles "problematic" humor when criticizing Donald Trump

[Alex_Mexico]

I'm at work and haven't been able to watch it fully but here's her description of the episode:

This is the second episode of Feminist Frequency’s new series, The FREQ Show! With The FREQ Show, we’re answering the question, “What do representations of race, gender and sexuality in pop culture have to do with our current social and political climate?”

Despite Trump and his bumbling administration giving us no shortage of legitimate reasons to criticize and mock them every day, many people resort to homophobic jokes and body-shaming insults in an effort to lampoon our current disaster-in-chief. In this episode of The FREQ Show, we break down what makes this “problematic” humor such a problem, demonstrating how it reinforces the very ideas of traditional masculinity that helped propel Trump to the White House in the first place.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfv5grvG5qw

 

[Makonero]

the left eats itself

 

[DarkKyo]

I haven't watched this yet, but by "homophobic jokes" is she referring to what Colbert said?

 

[akira28]

the left eats itself

it keeps us honest. but we also know how to balance it.

 

[ElectricBlanketFire]

I'm less sympathetic toward a racist sexual predator with a long history of body shaming everyone and everything. Especially since it bothers him so much (see: tiny hands).

 

[BocoDragon]

the left eats itself

The only one eating is that ugly fatty Trump.*

*

Spoiler

satire(tm)

 

[digitalrelic]

I haven't watched this yet, but by "homophobic jokes" is she referring to what Colbert said?

Seems that way. Disappointing that she went that route.

 

[norm9]

Problematic is the president, not the jokes and quips directed at him.

 

[TestOfTide]

I usually like what Anita has to say but she is absolutely wrong here. Part of the problem the past decade has been that democrats, liberals, and progressives have been too nice and politically correct to the other side, even though conservatives claim they are being persecuted no matter what.

I say that the methods should always be shame, humiliation, and mean-spiritedness when dealing with the deplorables.

 

[Alex_Mexico]

I haven't watched this yet, but by "homophobic jokes" is she referring to what Colbert said?

In part, yeah. She basically says we should concentrate our humor and criticism on what he's doing wrong instead of ad honemin attacks, body shaming jokes, etc. Attack the man for who he is instead of how he looks as to not lower to his level.

I know its easier said than done but I think she has some good points.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

I'm less sympathetic toward a racist sexual predator with a long history of body shaming everyone and everything. Especially since it bothers him so much (see: tiny hands).

I don't think she's concerned with sympathy for the president, but how joking that him fellating Putin is being less manly may promote the idea that gay men can't be manly.

 

[Kthulhu]

I haven't watched this yet, but by "homophobic jokes" is she referring to what Colbert said?

What did Colbert say?

 

[Lord Fagan]

She's entitled to her opinion, but I thought Colbert's joke was funny as fuck.

 

[kirblar]

Yep. Disappointing that she went that route.

Very. Joke's only "homophobic" if you think that there's something wrong w/ gay sex.

 

[ldcommando]

I haven't watched this yet, but by "homophobic jokes" is she referring to what Colbert said?

it´s the first thing of the video

 

[EatinOlives]

What did Colbert say?

He said that the only good thing Trump's mouth is for is to be Putin's cockholster.

 

[DarkKyo]

What did Colbert say?

He called Trump, "Putin's Cock-holster."

 

[Tal Shiar Agent]

I don't think she's concerned with sympathy for the president, but how joking that him fellating Putin in being less manly may promote the idea that gay men can't be manly.

That wasn't the joke. Joke was that Trump services/serves/submits to Putin.

 

[marrec]

it keeps us honest. but we also know how to balance it.

Yup, ain't no problem with examining this shit, as long as we aren't killing ourselves or each other trying to police this shit.

 

[PSqueak]

I haven't watched this yet, but by "homophobic jokes" is she referring to what Colbert said?

Technically, wouldn't it be more like slut shaming? since the point of the insult was not "lol, trump gay" but "trump is putin's slut/bitch", while "problematic" since it's demeaning to women in root, technically wasn't going for the homophobic angle.

But i might be overthinking this.

 

[Oersted]

Sans the Colbert joke, she isn't wrong. But when it comes to Donald, I will give people a pass.

 

[Fuchsdh]

I don't think she's concerned with sympathy for the president, but how joking that him fellating Putin in being less manly may promote the idea that gay men can't be manly.

I can see that viewpoint, but I view it as attacking Trump by his own standards. It's him and his supporters who hold to this view of masculinity that he himself is pathetic against. Just like the only "cocksuckers" who deserve scorns are the ones that want to throw gay people in jail and preach the Word of the Lord while they fuck guys in airport stalls.

 

[SuperStiltzkin]

Saying Trump is in bed with Putin isn't shaming gay sex.

 

[Moosichu]

In part, yeah. She basically says we should concentrate our humor and criticism on what he's doing wrong instead of ad honemin attacks, body shaming jokes, etc. Attack the man for who he is instead of how he looks as to not lower to his level.

I know its easier said than done but I think she has some good points.

It's interesting though, as Colbert does provide clever, nuanced critique - this is what got in the headlines though. This got Trump's attention and worked, while hopefully attracting people to his show.

 

[Nesotenso]

didn't think anything Colbert said was wrong.

 

[Ogodei]

I mean, it's certainly worthwhile to build on the fact that almost all of our go-to insults are ableist (setting aside "retard," moron and idiot were the old terms for the mentally challenged or non-neurotypical), sexist (i've been trying to self-police my own use of the word bitch lately and man is it hard to run a good rant without it), or homophobic.

The problem with such tone policing is its used by people who don't give a damn about the differently abled, queer-folk, or women just to try to score rhetorical points. If you're spending more energy going after Colbert as a homophobe than going after Trump as a homophobe, you're part of the problem, because you're providing cover for people who would do actual harm to the vulnerable while white-knighting with your tone policing.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Very. Joke's only "homophobic" if you think that there's something wrong w/ gay sex.

Huh? The intent of the joke was to mock Trump. People aren't criticizing the notion of gay sex, people are criticizing the idea of using it as an insult.

This all kind of reminds me of a story involving Lindsey Graham and Caitlyn Jenner on Raw Story, where Graham made a bordering on positive comment about Jenner, and commenters took to mocking him - mainly suggesting that Jenner is manlier than he is and suggesting that he's a woman or gay or trans or whatever. The issue isn't the target, the issue is how the person is targeted. If someone calls Graham a tranny or a faggot, is that not problematic?

I mean, it's certainly worthwhile to build on the fact that almost all of our go-to insults are ableist (setting aside "retard," moron and idiot were the old terms for the mentally challenged or non-neurotypical), sexist (i've been trying to self-police my own use of the word bitch lately and man is it hard to run a good rant without it), or homophobic.

The problem with such tone policing is its used by people who don't give a damn about the differently abled, queer-folk, or women just to try to score rhetorical points. If you're spending more energy going after Colbert as a homophobe than going after Trump as a homophobe, you're part of the problem, because you're providing cover for people who would do actual harm to the vulnerable while white-knighting with your tone policing.

Erm, Anita's a woman, so I don't know what you mean by this. I also see plenty of the people you describe talk about the flippant use of such mockery. You also suggest that people criticizing Colbert aren't going after Trump, which I think I'll call out as being rather a pile of bullshit.

It's also a matter of how this commentary sounds a lot like how upset people were when BLM was protesting Bernie and Clinton instead of Bush. It's more valuable to speak to people who will change than people who won't.

 

[captmcblack]

Users on alt-GAFs and other forums found probably the one time ever they're happy/interested in a Sarkeesian video, lol.

 

[SparkleMotion]

Sarkeesian thinks there is something offensive about gay sex?

 

[TissueBox]

 

[Kinyou]

I can see that viewpoint, but I view it as attacking Trump by his own standards. It's him and his supporters who hold to this view of masculinity that he himself is pathetic against. Just like the only "cocksuckers" who deserve scorns are the ones that want to throw gay people in jail and preach the Word of the Lord while they fuck guys in airport stalls.

Exactly.

 

[Alex_Mexico]

It's interesting though, as Colbert does provide clever, nuanced critique - this is what got in the headlines though. This got Trump's attention and worked, while hopefully attracting people to his show.

Well the same can be said about Trump's campaign now, isn't it? What first got him the attention were the "Mexicans are rapists" accusations. Hell, he inspired fans to follow him with his years of prepostrous accusations that the first black President was also a secret Kenian muslim.

 

[Kthulhu]

He said that the only good thing Trump's mouth is for is to be Putin's cockholster.

Perhaps I need to see it in context, but that doesn't seem too bad.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

Honestly I think this would have been better done in response to the language and rhetoric some employ towards Kellyanne Conway than Trump. Some of the misogynistic language, and that terrible terrible SNL thing, were more problematic to me. But she's been less in the news for a bit now so not as relevant.

 

[kirblar]

Huh? The intent of the joke was to mock Trump. People aren't criticizing the notion of gay sex, people are criticizing the idea of using it as an insult.

This all kind of reminds me of a story involving Lindsey Graham and Caitlyn Jenner on Raw Story, where Graham made a bordering on positive comment about Jenner, and commenters took to mocking him - mainly suggesting that Jenner is manlier than he is and suggesting that he's a woman or gay or trans or whatever. The issue isn't the target, the issue is how the person is targeted. If someone calls Graham a tranny or a faggot, is that not problematic?

But it's not about "manlinesss" or "womanliness", it's about Trump eagerly pleasuring Putin at Putin's beck and call.

 

[starchild excalibur]

I don't think she's concerned with sympathy for the president, but how joking that him fellating Putin is being less manly may promote the idea that gay men can't be manly.

Not saying there's only one way to take Colbert's joke, but I never had this reading of it. The joke wasn't about gay sex being icky or gross or about cock-sucking as being subservient or feminized, but about Trump and Putin being so intimate and unprofessional in their relationship that they may as well be fucking each other.

Maybe that's why I never got the whole backlash to the joke some people had to it (not including conservatives who co-opted it).

Saying Trump is in bed with Putin isn't shaming gay sex.

Basically.

 

[Lord Frieza]

This is legitimately a case of PC going way too far.

 

[jtb]

I can see that viewpoint, but I view it as attacking Trump by his own standards. It's him and his supporters who hold to this view of masculinity that he himself is pathetic against. Just like the only "cocksuckers" who deserve scorns are the ones that want to throw gay people in jail and preach the Word of the Lord while they fuck guys in airport stalls.

Well, then you run the risk of having the argument on their terms, rather than ours. Basically even when we "win", we lose because we're further entrenching this hyper-masculine-insecurity mindset into our culture.

You always run the risk of becoming the thing you satirize or criticize.

 

[Alex_Mexico]

Sarkeesian thinks there is something offensive about gay sex?

You should probably watch the video before commenting like that. Because you clearly didn't.

 

[Demoskinos]

Very. Joke's only "homophobic" if you think that there's something wrong w/ gay sex.

^ This.

 

[DrROBschiz]

damnit Anita im trying to keep up with the news


do your analysis later when the country isnt actively burning to the ground

 

[SocksAndShoes]

What a weird, pointless hill to die on.

People need to be attacking Trump from every possible angle. We don't know to a self-examination to find out if we're being too mean to him. Let the history books sort that one out.

 

[1044]

So are we allowed to use faggot as an insult again as long as it's against Trump?

 

[IrishNinja]

the left eats itself

yes, we should all be on the same page & never question anything

 

[Kinyou]

Honestly I think this would have been better done in response to the language and rhetoric some employ towards Kellyanne Conway than Trump. Some of the misogynistic language, and that terrible terrible SNL thing, were more problematic to me. But she's been less in the news for a bit now so not as relevant.

What Snl thing are you referring to? The skit where she's a psycho stalker? Thought that was a pretty good parody

 

[Sirpopopop]

In part, yeah. She basically says we should concentrate our humor and criticism on what he's doing wrong instead of ad honemin attacks, body shaming jokes, etc. Attack the man for who he is instead of how he looks as to not lower to his level.

I know its easier said than done but I think she has some good points.

That works... never.

That's the type of strategy which got us into this situation in the first place. Because the Left never viciously attacked the Right the way they were attacked by the Right for years, it allowed "both sides" to become a fucking thing. We do a minor mistake, it's viewed as the fundamental equivalent of a major gaffe by them, because Republicans know how to blow shit up. The Left makes a minor mistake, parts of the Left view it as a reason to "both sides" out of voting for a candidate.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

I can see that viewpoint, but I view it as attacking Trump by his own standards. It's him and his supporters who hold to this view of masculinity that he himself is pathetic against. Just like the only "cocksuckers" who deserve scorns are the ones that want to throw gay people in jail and preach the Word of the Lord while they fuck guys in airport stalls.

That's fine if it's clear it's meant to show him acting like a hypocrite. I personally don't have much an opinion on Colbert's joke in particular, just was describing my interpretation of what she may have thought the issue was.

 

[A Link to the Past]

But it's not about "manlinesss" or "womanliness", it's about Trump eagerly pleasuring Putin at Putin's beck and call.

Using gay sex to represent his submissiveness.

Thinking that people are denigrating gay sex when they tell you to not use the idea of two people having gay sex together as a form of mockery is really silly.

 

[SuperBanana]

"In this case homoerotic equates to homophobic"

What? No it doesn't. No one is saying it's shameful to have gay sex. It would only be that way if people were LITERALLY claiming Trump and Putin had sex and give them shit for it. They're saying they're in bed politically with each other and that Trump is submissive to him.

 

[TestOfTide]

Huh? The intent of the joke was to mock Trump. People aren't criticizing the notion of gay sex, people are criticizing the idea of using it as an insult.

This all kind of reminds me of a story involving Lindsey Graham and Caitlyn Jenner on Raw Story, where Graham made a bordering on positive comment about Jenner, and commenters took to mocking him - mainly suggesting that Jenner is manlier than he is and suggesting that he's a woman or gay or trans or whatever. The issue isn't the target, the issue is how the person is targeted. If someone calls Graham a tranny or a faggot, is that not problematic?

The difference there is that the "joke" used against Graham is literally just "haha Graham is gay" whereas the jokes about Trump have been "Trump likes Putin way too much".