The Daily Show & Colbert Report - Transphobia is Not Satire

[Orange Juche]

While I think we all know that the Daily Show & Colbert Report (which I assume the vast majority of you are familiar with, even outside the United States) are liberal and are certainly not radical - I remember reading here and there in the past on these forums that some here do watch those shows. Being someone that appreciates satire, and that hasn't expected anything more than a left liberal position, I've watched and enjoyed these shows. Not religiously, but occasionally. However,

As someone who watched the Daily Show and Colbert Report on occasion (I know, I know, but they can be amusing), and I know others on here do too based on comments I've seen on past threads, I was surprised (and as a trans person, very upset, to find this (the blog is good, what it covers and exposes isn't.): http://yourmomentofhate.tumblr.com/

I never really watched these shows enough that I've never seen these jokes, but I guess transphobia (particularly trans-misogyny) is common, especially with Colbert. With Colbert, it's the same tired jokes - he either notes something that has "tran" in the beginning of the word (ex "Head of the Department of Transportation), and then shortens it to "or, 'Tranny'". Which is a slur. Or, making weak trans jokes about "her" adam's apple, big hands, etc. De-legitimizing trans-people (particularly trans-women), and making us the punchline. And people laugh. And it's painful. (I recommend the site I linked)

The worst example comes from The Daily Show, though. This was from a few years back, when Dennis Kucinich was running in the Democratic Primaries (I think 2008):

John Stewart: “But, as always in these debates, it’s left to the longest shot to say the craziest thing. (smugly) I give you Ohio Representative, Dennis Kucinich.”

Clip of Dennis Kucinich: I’d nominate any gay to the Supreme Court, or lesbian or bisexual or transgendered person to the Supreme Court (as long as they were ready to uphold Roe v. Wade)

John Stewart: “Yes, Yes. All rise for the honorable Justice Chick with Dick!”


A video of that can be found here: http://yourmomentofhate.tumblr.com/post/42481415783/starts-at-2-30-john-stewart-but-as-always-in


Even amongst so called "liberals" and "progressives" we are a punchline until the day it'll become more politically advantageous to be pro-trans, when which they'll follow suit. Not only do they disgust me - what really, really disgusts me is that people who describe themselves as "left wing" laugh at this shit (and some even consider themselves allies!), and there's virtually no outrage whatsoever. Not even organizations that like to tack T on for numbers like GLAAD are saying anything.


I just thought it was worth sharing because I think this is an indication of where the trans community stands, even amongst people that call themselves "left" (well, liberals). And how absolutely disgusting and disappointing it is. It makes me sick.

[Slavic]

How is this any different than the Daily Show and Colbert Report making racial humor about whites, blacks, asians etc. Or stereotypical humor about christians, muslims, jews. Or humor about anything for that matter.

These shows are comedies and they poke fun at anything and everything they can. Don't feel shocked and appalled when one of their jokes happens to be directed toward a group that you associate yourself with.

[Remus Bleys]

How is this any different than the Daily Show and Colbert Report making racial humor about white... christians... Or humor about anything for that matter.
:laugh::laugh::laugh: do I really need to type something out?

Poor white people and christians! All humor is on par with humor at the trans community's expense, so quit being upset!

Jesus, please don't actually have this attitude.

[Orange Juche]

How is this any different than the Daily Show and Colbert Report making racial humor about whites, blacks, asians etc. Or stereotypical humor about christians, muslims, jews. Or humor about anything for that matter.

These shows are comedies and they poke fun at anything and everything they can. Don't feel shocked and appalled when one of their jokes happens to be directed toward a group that you associate yourself with.

Can you provide examples that are equivalent, where they are "punching down" in their "humor"? Where the subject of said jokes is mocking the group itself? When the hell did either of these shows make a joke victimizing blacks as the punchline, as thugs, criminals, or some other stereotype? Can you provide any evidence of equivalent treatment of other minorities*, where they are the punchline, where their existence is what is supposed to be whats funny? Because something tells me, you can't. Something else tells me you have no idea how fucking dehumanizing that is, and something else tells me you are far from an ally to the trans community.

What the hell are you even doing here?

*(EDIT: I was later corrected in this threat that at least with feminists there have also been issues, I apologize, and there may have been other groups. But for the most part, I'd argue, they play the progressive "we'd never be prejudiced!" position and are full of shit)

[Slavic]

:laugh::laugh::laugh: do I really need to type something out?

Poor white people and christians! All humor is on par with humor at the trans community's expense, so quit being upset!

Jesus, please don't actually have this attitude.

So a joke that exploits a stereotype of white people is fine, but a joke that exploits a stereotype of transsexuals is crossing the line? Sounds likes political correctness bullshit. Why can't I enjoy comedy for the sake of comedy? Do you think that the Daily Show and the Colbert Report are actively seeking to disenfranchise transexuals though humor?

[Hrafn]

What the hell are you even doing here?

I like these threads. Good litmus test for reactionaries.

[Orange Juche]

So a joke that exploits a stereotype of white people is fine, but a joke that exploits a stereotype of transsexuals is crossing the line? Sounds likes political correctness bullshit. Why can't I enjoy comedy for the sake of comedy? Do you think that the Daily Show and the Colbert Report are actively seeking to disenfranchise transexuals though humor?

I'm white too, I know the struggle. Like one time, I was breaking into my own car and a cop came up to me to ask about something else, and then left. THEY DIDN'T EVEN ASK FOR PROOF THAT IT WAS MY CAR, OR THROW ME UP AGAINST IT AND CALL ME A THUG! (true story)
No but really you're a lost cause, I'm not going to bother trying to explain it any further.

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

So a joke that exploits a stereotype of white people is fine but a joke that exploits a stereotype of transsexuals is crossing the line?

White people suffer no structural racism, discrimination, orientalism, or other forms of national oppression.

41% of transpeople have attempted suicide, 19% have been denied medical attention due to their gender, 2% have been physically assulted in the doctors office due to their gender. The suicide rate is 25 times higher than that of heterosexuals by the way:

Source: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/40279043/


Sounds likes political correctness bullshit. Why can't I enjoy comedy for the sake of comedy? Do you think that the Daily Show and the Colbert Report are actively seeking to disenfranchise transexuals though humor?


Because comedy doesn't occur in a social vacuum, the humor is a direct result of the hegemony of bourgeois ideology and the dehumanization of transpeople. These jokes are a direct reflection of transphobia in our culture, hence the struggle against transphobia can not be removed from the struggle against culture, as to remove one from the other is to negate the entire Marxist framework.

[Slavic]

I like these threads. Good litmus test for reactionaries.

Yes your right, I must obviously be a reactionary because I have a different view on comedy. You got me.

@Spanish Moss
I don't feel like searching through Daily Show episodes to pin point jokes, but you've stated that you have watched the show. How is the Daily Show's humor anything but exposing or exploiting stereotypes for humor? They use that tactic for what ever group is currently in the political spot light.

Also thank you for deducing my entire view on transgenders based on my response to a Daily Show joke. If you really wanted to understand my "allegiance" to the transgendered community you could have asked nicely. I might have even told you that I am very support and at a time was engaged in a serious relationship with a transwomen. But please, go on and deduce my views and existence on this forum from two lines.

[Sabot Cat]

Yes your right, I must obviously be a reactionary because I have a different view on comedy. You got me.

@Spanish Moss
I don't feel like searching through Daily Show episodes to pin point jokes, but you've stated that you have watched the show. How is the Daily Show's humor anything but exposing or exploiting stereotypes for humor? They use that tactic for what ever group is currently in the political spot light.

No, the punchline of Jon Stewart's joke was that Dennis Kucinich was crazy enough to push for a trans woman as a Supreme Court justice, which is evidently an idea that's inherently absurd.


Also thank you for deducing my entire view on transgenders based on my response to a Daily Show joke. If you really wanted to understand my "allegiance" to the transgendered community you could have asked nicely. I might have even told you that I am very support and at a time was engaged in a serious relationship with a transwomen. But please, go on and deduce my views and existence on this forum from two lines.

You saying you're allied doesn't make it so. I could say that I'm supportive of the proletariat, but if I condone humor that marginalizes working class people as a whole in of themselves without being a proletarian myself, then I don't think anyone could or should believe what I say. And one can be sexist and have a girlfriend, so I see no reason why having a relationship with a trans woman would certify your status as an advocate.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

From the blog:


“But Cow and Chipmunk are not alone! They are joined by Transvestite, who worries that her true gender will be revealed by this new system.”

Voiceover with fake translation: “I am afraid that when I lumber out of my apartment in a tight dress with my scrotum taped back and my large hands covering my adams apple, somewhere, some bureaucrat will know I am a dude.”

-Jon Stewart

What in the fuck. I thought it might be cold humour but this is downright fucking disgusting.

I admit, I had enjoyed some of Stephen Colberts' shows (John Stewart not so much), but I had no idea about this.

Edit: What's with the enormous number of guests hovering over this thread?

[Ele'ill]

Thanks for making a thread about this. From what I've seen of it I don't like the show anyways and I don't find it surprising at all that they'd pull stuff like this, or that there are leftists who make exceptions.

[the debater]

So a joke that exploits a stereotype of white people is fine, but a joke that exploits a stereotype of transsexuals is crossing the line? Sounds likes political correctness bullshit. Why can't I enjoy comedy for the sake of comedy? Do you think that the Daily Show and the Colbert Report are actively seeking to disenfranchise transexuals though humor?

The golden rule of comedy isn't to avoid offending people. It's to make fun of anybody and everybody equally. Shows like Colbert Report, Daily Show, South Park, Boondocks, and other such shows make fun of everybody. Now, I admit that I'm not trans-gender, so I am unaware of the struggles that trans-gender people face. But nevertheless, as long as these comedy shows aren't singling out anybody for ridicule and leaving other groups alone, then chances are they aren't trying to be offensive with their jokes. Maybe. This is not meant to be a definite once-and-for all post, so be aware of that.

[Brandon's Impotent Rage]

There is no excuse for that bit of transphobic humor....

....however, I would like to point out that the joke in question was made almost ten years ago during the 2004 election. Alot has changed in that time, and so have attitudes. I'm sure that Stewart, were he confronted on it, would own up to his mistake and apologize.

[Ele'ill]

the two hosts of those shows pose as being politically/socially aware of various issues

[Ele'ill]

....however, I would like to point out that the joke in question was made almost ten years ago during the 2004 election. Alot has changed in that time, and so have attitudes. I'm sure that Stewart, were he confronted on it, would own up to his mistake and apologize.


What evidence do you have to back up that a lot has changed, specifically 'attitudes'? What makes you say that Stewart would own up to it?

[o well this is ok I guess]

Just a disclaimer, I'm not justifying transphobic jokes by colbert, merely explaining why colbert jokes are mostly never looked at as offensive.
Colberts jokes are not in themselves jokes, they are funny in light of the persona. You know, the persona of the staunch republican. In that light, it would be senseless for Colbert not to be, well, transphobic, racist, sexist, the whole gamut. You know, you're supposed to laugh via the association of the absurd position of the joke with whatever right wing position is in the news. That said, there is a collection of jokes by Colbert that don't fit this criterion, and were just thrown out because they seemed funny, such is the ever occurring "I nearly slept with a transexual" schtick, which is just straight offensive. Really, colbert is only funny when he's rigidly adhering to the above formula, otherwise he comes off as really offensive.
Dunno what's stewarts excuse, tho.

[Sabot Cat]

The golden rule of comedy isn't to avoid offending people. It's to make fun of anybody and everybody equally. Shows like Colbert Report, Daily Show, South Park, Boondocks, and other such shows make fun of everybody. Now, I admit that I'm not trans-gender, so I am unaware of the struggles that trans-gender people face. But nevertheless, as long as these comedy shows aren't singling out anybody for ridicule and leaving other groups alone, then chances are they aren't trying to be offensive with their jokes. Maybe. This is not meant to be a definite once-and-for all post, so be aware of that.

You can't target everyone equally, because our society isn't equal.

When your comedy show exists in the hierarchical infrastructure of your world, you are reinforcing that infrastructure by creating statements that can easily be distributed and utilized by those who seek to oppress others. Malicious jokes about white people, Christians, rich people, etc. are pretty harmless because those groups are not in a vulnerable position for being those things. But when you make malicious jokes about minorities, especially about minorities whom the general public lacks either empathy or knowledge (such as trans people), then you are acting in solidarity with the oppressors, making things more difficult for the oppressed.

So I don't care if they don't mean to be offensive. Motives aren't magic. If they are making my life harder by co-opting the hierarchy that actively oppresses me, if they signal to other allegedly progressive people that I am not a part of their movement and it's okay to spew this trash at me, then I am justified in my vigorous opposition to them.

[Orange Juche]

The golden rule of comedy isn't to avoid offending people. It's to make fun of anybody and everybody equally. Shows like Colbert Report, Daily Show, South Park, Boondocks, and other such shows make fun of everybody. Now, I admit that I'm not trans-gender, so I am unaware of the struggles that trans-gender people face. But nevertheless, as long as these comedy shows aren't singling out anybody for ridicule and leaving other groups alone, then chances are they aren't trying to be offensive with their jokes. Maybe. This is not meant to be a definite once-and-for all post, so be aware of that.

See - but they don't. You don't see The Daily Show or Colbert Report doing blackface, dancing around in a gorilla costume (THANK GOD). And there's a reason for that. Yes, you can use virtually any topic for comedy - I even read a feminist piece once on how rape can be used in comedy - it's a matter of, are you punching down or punching up? Are you pointing out situational absurdity and throwing punches at those doing the oppression within a social context, or taking an oppressed group and victimizing them? (That feminist article gave a great example of a rape joke that's actually okay because it's punching up that I unfortunately can't remember, but the joke's premise was based on pointing out the horror and absurdity and violence of rape and siding with the raped, not legitimizing it through humor like so many other rape jokes). If Colbert said something from a position where he was clearly mocking what right wingers say through satire (which he does in NONE of the examples on that site), he'd be punching up. That'd be fine. He punches down at trans people.

These jokes are equivalent to mocking any other minority for being that minority, or playing superior to those minorities (which is the position from which these "jokes" come - one of authority and superiority). This is only "okay" because it's trans-people, one of the last groups it's virtually entirely socially acceptable to berate without any question. "Comedy" isn't a fucking get out of jail free card for reactionary, prejudiced bullshit, and I'm sick of hearing it used as an excuse for one. People that hide behind that are ideological cowards.

I've seriously been on these forums for almost ten years, and the fact that two people have already justified on the first damn page of the thread this absolutely abhorrent nonsense is starting to make this a really uncomfortable place to be, really quickly.

[Orange Juche]

Colberts jokes are not in themselves jokes, they are funny in light of the persona. You know, the persona of the staunch republican. In that light, it would be senseless for Colbert not to be, well, transphobic, racist, sexist, the whole gamut. You know, you're supposed to laugh via the association of the absurd position of the joke with whatever right wing position is in the news. That said, there is a collection of jokes by Colbert that don't fit this criterion, and were just thrown out because they seemed funny, such is the ever occurring "I nearly slept with a transexual" schtick, which is just straight offensive. Really, colbert is only funny when he's rigidly adhering to the above formula, otherwise he comes off as really offensive.
Dunno what's stewarts excuse, tho.

The site I linked explicitly explains why what you said isn't true.

[o well this is ok I guess]

If Colbert said something from a position where he was clearly mocking what right wingers say through satire (which he does in NONE of the examples on that site), he'd be punching up. That'd be fine. He punches down at trans people.

The site I linked explicitly explains why what you said isn't true. As I said: if he's not rigidly adhering to the formula above then he's not being funny, just offensive, and it follows that every joke in the blog isn't funny in the slightest. And though I'd like to think that he's made a joke along the lines of the formula in regards to trans folk, I must admit that none come to mind, which doesn't bode well for his case.

So, what I said is entirely meaningless, as colbert never applies that formula to transgendered folk. I merely assumed that because it appears to be equal across the board that is without properly verifying such, and I'm sorry for that.

[Art Vandelay]

While I agree with the sentiment of the op, one can't be serious in saying 'you cant give me one example of him doing this to any other group' cause isn't very accurate. Dude rips on minorities on the time, had a bit called 'cooking with feminists' etc...the dude does this type of shit all the time, this really isn't anything new.

[Trap Queen Voxxy]

That's lame as fuck, I actually love both of those shows. I never heard those quotes though. Laaaaaaaaaaaaame.

[Orange Juche]

While I agree with the sentiment of the op, one can't be serious in saying 'you cant give me one example of him doing this to any other group' isn't very accurate. Dude rips on minorities on the time, had a bit called 'cooking with feminists' etc...the dude does this type of shit all the time, this really isn't anything new.

I'll rescind what I said there, I honestly haven't seen that. I got a little over-zealous when I typed that. Sorry.

[Art Vandelay]

That's lame as fuck, I actually love both of those shows. I never heard those quotes though. Laaaaaaaaaaaaame.

I'm not a big fan of Jon Stewart, but I am of the cr; our love of the show, was one of the few things my step dad and I had in common in my teenage years.

[Trap Queen Voxxy]

I'm not a big fan of Jon Stewart, but I am of the cr; our love of the show, was one of the few things my step dad and I had in common in my teenage years.

N'awwe, but anywho, idk, I've been a fan of the show for like ever and I feel even in his liberal bullshit, Stewart still touches on some genuine points and puts things into a more appropriate light more so than other "real," journalists from places likes FOX, MSNBC, CNN, etc.

[Art Vandelay]

N'awwe, but anywho, idk, I've been a fan of the show for like ever and I feel even in his liberal bullshit, Stewart still touches on some genuine points and puts things into a more appropriate light more so than other "real," journalists from places likes FOX, MSNBC, CNN, etc.

Oh it is certainly a lot of liberal bullshit, but at the same time I think what you say has an element of truth; it is essentially just as much of a credible news program as FOX/MSNBC, which is what gives it it's humour.

[the debater]

You can't target everyone equally, because our society isn't equal.

When your comedy show exists in the hierarchical infrastructure of your world, you are reinforcing that infrastructure by creating statements that can easily be distributed and utilized by those who seek to oppress others. Malicious jokes about white people, Christians, rich people, etc. are pretty harmless because those groups are not in a vulnerable position for being those things. But when you make malicious jokes about minorities, especially about minorities whom the general public lacks either empathy or knowledge (such as trans people), then you are acting in solidarity with the oppressors, making things more difficult for the oppressed.

So I don't care if they don't mean to be offensive. Motives aren't magic. If they are making my life harder by co-opting the hierarchy that actively oppresses me, if they signal to other allegedly progressive people that I am not a part of their movement and it's okay to spew this trash at me, then I am justified in my vigorous opposition to them.

You bring up a legitimate point. I see what you're saying, and perhaps a compromise to this would be for specific groups to stick to making fun of their own specific groups. It's like how the Boondocks makes fun of black people, while primarily being a "black" television show. And yes, you have to be careful about how audience members are going to react to your jokes. Are they going to take those jokes in stride, or are they going to take them seriously?

[Sabot Cat]

I believe Jon Stewart is partially responsible for the false equivalence of MSNBC and Fox News, and smearing all media outlets as fundamentally flawed for marginal reasons (they're not bad because they're bourgeois, they're bad because they're dishonest/alarmist/easily distracted by shiny things/etc.) . I wonder who is the beneficiary of that sanctimonious criticism? Hmm...

And although they may be merely liberal, and not revolutionary, I have yet to watch a MSNBC broadcast where they trample on oppressed groups like trans people with their rhetoric. (At least not trans people in particular.)


You bring up a legitimate point. I see what you're saying, and perhaps a compromise to this would be for specific groups to stick to making fun of their own specific groups. It's like how the Boondocks makes fun of black people, while primarily being a "black" television show. And yes, you have to be careful about how audience members are going to react to your jokes. Are they going to take those jokes in stride, or are they going to take them seriously?

Indeed, it's a completely different affair when a marginalized group is making jokes about themselves, because they're often more capable of making well-informed comedy that can't easily be utilized as a tool of oppression. The Boondocks is a prime example of good satire for that reason (I also think it's neat that Huey is a revolutionary leftist).

[Comrade Chernov]

God, this thread reminds me of the time I tried to convince a fellow "Socialist" that Feminism and Women's Liberation was a vital aspect of the revolution, and they were having none of it.

So, I'll reiterate my stance:

If someone condones the oppression or otherwise maltreatment of an oppressed group - especially if members of said group are prominent within Leftist organizations - then the person who condones said oppression isn't a Leftist in my eyes. Not anything more than a wannabe one, at the very least.

I used to like Colbert and Stewart, and I suppose I never noticed the transphobic jokes (then again, the last time I watched the shows I didn't know what being trans was), but it's damn certain that I'm not watching their crap again.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Liberals. :rolleyes:

Then again, I've seen liberals use slurs against reactionary writer Ann Coulter that are transphobic (and she's not even trans). They "justify" it because they don't like her politics, but it says far more about them.

[Art Vandelay]

Liberals. :rolleyes:

Then again, I've seen liberals use slurs against reactionary writer Ann Coulter that are transphobic (and she's not even trans). They "justify" it because they don't like her politics, but it says far more about them.

I don't think anyone here has tried to justify anything Colbert said? At least I wasn't. I also think there is something highly problematic about thinking there is anything revolutionary about what one chooses to watch on t.v. Hell I've watched cops before, would this make me a cop lover? I think there is only one response to how prevalent this type of stuff still is in the general discourse and that is condemnation, but to liken watching a t.v. show, to thinking feminism and women's liberation aren't a vital aspect of the revolution, is a bit of a stretch no?

e: Actually, I guess there were some people justifying it on the first page, my bad.

[Ele'ill]

I don't think anyone here has tried to justify anything Colbert said? At least I wasn't.

Yeah, a few users tried to apologize for it by saying something like 'comedy targets everyone therefore it isn't a bad thing' which several other users pointed out is a very poor excuse.



I also think there is something highly problematic about thinking there is anything revolutionary about what one chooses to watch on t.v. Hell I've watched cops before, would this make me a cop lover?

If you thought what the cops and courts and prisons were doing to people was funny or cool yes it would make you a 'cop lover'.


I think there is only one response to how prevalent this type of stuff still is in the general discourse and that is condemnation, but to liken watching a t.v. show, to thinking feminism and women's liberation aren't a vital aspect of the revolution, is a bit of a stretch no?

If you genuinely understand or are making genuine attempts to understand feminism and women's liberation and see yourself playing an active role within those things you won't be wallowing in things that are diametrically opposed to them.

[Art Vandelay]

Yeah, a few users tried to apologize for it by saying something like 'comedy targets everyone therefore it isn't a bad thing' which several other users pointed out is a very poor excuse.

Yeah I went back and re read that first page after I posted, that's why I included that edit.


If you thought what the cops and courts and prisons were doing to people was funny or cool yes it would make you a 'cop lover'.

No I think that show in particular is pretty brutal since it seems to perpetuate a shit load of stereotypes. I just don't think one can make a very persuasive case on the correlation between what one watches on t.v. and ones politics.


If you genuinely understand or are making genuine attempts to understand feminism and women's liberation and see yourself playing an active role within those things you won't be wallowing in things that are diametrically opposed to them.

Who is talking about wallowing? I maybe watch the show every now and again at work when there is nothing to do and it happens to be on; his stuff on the Rob Ford scandal has been pretty funny. I don't really think that's much of a case for me being a liberal, nor anyone else here who perhaps watches the show; especially when stating that the only proper response to those types of jokes/comments is condemnation.

[Tolstoy]

Wow, you must be one silly limp wristed faggot to honestly give a shit about what a bunch of hook nosed jews have to say.

Just kidding, but seriously if theres one thing that puts people off, its being excessively P.C.

I would even go far as to say that political correctness is inherently classist, in that most politically correct language is chosen and selected by the upper classes

[Landsharks eat metal]

Wow, you must be one silly limp wristed faggot to honestly give a shit about what a bunch of hook nosed jews have to say.

Just kidding, but seriously if theres one thing that puts people off, its being excessively P.C.

I would even go far as to say that political correctness is inherently classist, in that most politically correct language is chosen and selected by the upper classes
There's a difference between political correctness and not being an asshole. I do agree that "political correctness" can be taken too far, but I don't think this is an argument of political correctness at all. Do you really not see how using slurs and making fun of oppressed people for the very reasons they face oppression is not okay?

[Ele'ill]

No I think that show in particular is pretty brutal since it seems to perpetuate a shit load of stereotypes. I just don't think one can make a very persuasive case on the correlation between what one watches on t.v. and ones politics.

The question isn't so much what tv shows one watches it is the exceptions leftists in particular make in order to get enjoyment out of the tv shows or certain aspects of them or exceptions made in order to appreciate certain people like news figures, reporters, stand up comics, comedians with their own show, hosts of shows, etc.. or exceptions made in order to allow for the continuation of a project, organization etc.. towards a goal despite the desires or well being of individuals within it



Who is talking about wallowing? I maybe watch the show every now and again at work when there is nothing to do and it happens to be on; his stuff on the Rob Ford scandal has been pretty funny. I don't really think that's much of a case for me being a liberal, nor anyone else here who perhaps watches the show; especially when stating that the only proper response to those types of jokes/comments is condemnation.

I think you're changing the original point that some people in this thread were making (I could be wrong though maybe this is just the point I am making). Let's not take extremes such as 'i accidentally glanced at a tv screen in a cafe as I was walking past and the daily show was on does that make me transphobic' to apologize for the concept that so long as someone has other things to offer that they should be allowed to take runs at certain groups. That is a mentality that exists within spaces and organizations that alienates large groups of people and the defense is usually something like what we've seen here in this thread like 'it's just comedy tho' or 'words don't oppress' but what those things do if nothing else is remind us of other times that the words have been coupled with violence and actually just words can be bad enough.

[Ele'ill]

Wow, you must be one silly limp wristed faggot to honestly give a shit about what a bunch of hook nosed jews have to say.

Just kidding, but seriously if theres one thing that puts people off, its being excessively P.C.

I would even go far as to say that political correctness is inherently classist, in that most politically correct language is chosen and selected by the upper classes

not calling people homophobic/transphobic/racist slurs isn't being PC or excessively PC it's not being homophobic, transphobic, and racist

[Art Vandelay]

The question isn't so much what tv shows one watches it is the exceptions leftists in particular make in order to get enjoyment out of the tv shows or certain aspects of them or exceptions made in order to appreciate certain people like news figures, reporters, stand up comics, comedians with their own show, hosts of shows, etc.. or exceptions made in order to allow for the continuation of a project, organization etc.. towards a goal despite the desires or well being of individuals within it

But what exceptions were being made? To be clear I'm referring to what I've posted. The people who were trying to condone/justify are obviously wrong. Having said that I don't think there is anything wrong with someone watching/continuing to watch the colbert report, or that them watching it is somehow reflective of their politics. If we start to take that approach (not saying it was you who did), then what does it mean about my politics if I watch CBC or CNN? Transphobic nonsense, just like all other ignorant nonsense, deserves to be called out and condemned, obviously, but the whole you're a wanna be leftist if you continue to watch that show line seems like lifestylism of the worst variety.


I think you're changing the original point that some people in this thread were making (I could be wrong though maybe this is just the point I am making). Let's not take extremes such as 'i accidentally glanced at a tv screen in a cafe as I was walking past and the daily show was on does that make me transphobic' to apologize for the concept that so long as someone has other things to offer that they should be allowed to take runs at certain groups.

Well if that is the point you're making then we're in total agreement. I've never once said anything contrary to that and certainly haven't condoned the comments in question. I think alot of times he gets away with shit from people, because of the element his persona plays in his show; doesn't make it any more acceptable, that wasn't what I was trying to argue.


That is a mentality that exists within spaces and organizations that alienates large groups of people and the defense is usually something like what we've seen here in this thread like 'it's just comedy tho' or 'words don't oppress' but what those things do if nothing else is remind us of other times that the words have been coupled with violence and actually just words can be bad enough.

And I think that's a totally valid perspective. Again wasn't trying to defend Colbert's comments, let alone try and rationalize this as 'its okay, its just comedy.'

[Tolstoy]

I have to apologize about the above post, I was listening to Big Black and feeling transgressive and trollish

[Ele'ill]

But what exceptions were being made? To be clear I'm referring to what I've posted. The people who were trying to condone/justify are obviously wrong.

I addressed what I wanted to address pretty clearly.



Having said that I don't think there is anything wrong with someone watching/continuing to watch the colbert report,

I suppose I don't care to police what people watch but I am immediately skeptical or cautious when people tell me they watch, read, participate in, certain things. I'm not saying I immediately launch a crusade against them but there is obviously criticisms, some of which I'm mentioned in my posts in this thread, that I don't think can be ignored.




or that them watching it is somehow reflective of their politics.

It kind of is though. It depends on the media source too. I don't find either of these shows in particular to state anything new so I'd rather seek out a comedy piece from some other location (there are many) directly related to this and probably most important I find both of these shows seem to miss the point a lot of the time and cater to liberal politics. I am not a liberal, I find a lot wrong with what liberals desire politically/socially. I don't watch either of these shows because they are loaded with it. It's like wading through a sewage runoff to find a penny, I'd rather not waste my time.




If we start to take that approach (not saying it was you who did), then what does it mean about my politics if I watch CBC or CNN?

It depends on why you watch them.



Transphobic nonsense, just like all other ignorant nonsense, deserves to be called out and condemned, obviously, but the whole you're a wanna be leftist if you continue to watch that show line seems like lifestylism of the worst variety.

Not really I think folks should be able to back up why they like what they like without using 'you're a lifestylist' as a cop-out. That's not an answer for the critical questions of why folks make exceptions to participate in things that are anything but critical thinking and anything but radical.

[Art Vandelay]

I suppose I don't care to police what people watch but I am immediately skeptical or cautious when people tell me they watch, read, participate in, certain things. I'm not saying I immediately launch a crusade against them but there is obviously criticisms, some of which I'm mentioned in my posts in this thread, that I don't think can be ignored.

I think your probably reading way to into their motivations for watching certain things than. Is there anywhere on t.v. where people can get a political perspective to the left of liberal? No. So then why is me merely watching cnn/the colbert report/whatever with the critical eye of a radical, enough to make you skeptical of my politics? Is indie media the only acceptable source for news for a radical?


It kind of is though. It depends on the media source too. I don't find either of these shows in particular to state anything new so I'd rather seek out a comedy piece from some other location (there are many) directly related to this and probably most important I find both of these shows seem to miss the point a lot of the time and cater to liberal politics. I am not a liberal, I find a lot wrong with what liberals desire politically/socially. I don't watch either of these shows because they are loaded with it. It's like wading through a sewage runoff to find a penny, I'd rather not waste my time.

Just because the politics are awful on the daily show and colbert report, doesn't mean that they never say anything humorous (which is the primary reason to watch those programs, I don't think anyone seriously gets their news from them), or can't be enjoyable merely from an entertainment standpoint.


It depends on why you watch them.

Probably a combination of being bored/happening to see it on the t.v./ for a laugh, as I would assume would be almost everyone's motivation.


Not really I think folks should be able to back up why they like what they like without using 'you're a lifestylist' as a cop-out. That's not an answer for the critical questions of why folks make exceptions to participate in things that are anything but critical thinking and anything but radical.

Because not everything has to constantly be political? Calling lifestylism on this is not a cop out at all, this is lifestylism of the worst sorts. If an individual enjoys playing a video game like grand theft auto, is this enough to cast suspicion that perhaps they condone any of the stereotypes/indiscriminate violence portrayed?

[Ele'ill]

I think your probably reading way too into their motivations for watching certain things then. Is there anywhere on t.v. where people can get a political perspective to the left of liberal? No. So then why is me merely watching cnn/the colbert report/whatever with the critical eye of a radical, enough to make you skeptical of my politics? Is indie media the only acceptable source for news for a radical?

There is a difference between the various media things you've listed here. Mainstream news sources often cover facts on breaking news and once the opinion/discussion pieces begin it changes over in tone. Liberal comedy 'news' is backlogged news of interest to liberals with a specifically liberal spin to it, at least the vast majority of it especially the case with these two shows. I am critically reading into (asking questions) as to why radicals watch various shows, participate in certain actions or events, read certain texts, laugh at certain jokes, so on and so forth. Regarding acceptable news for radicals I already stated that I'm not interested in policing what folks watch and I already stated what this means and what it doesn't mean.






Just because the politics are awful on the daily show and colbert report, doesn't mean that they never say anything humorous (which is the primary reason to watch those programs, I don't think anyone seriously gets their news from them), or can't be enjoyable merely from an entertainment standpoint.

If there is a piece on something that I find relevant I may either watch the video clip of it or read responses to it. This is the penny at the bottom of the sewage run off. I am always disappointed.



Because not everything has to constantly be political?

when politics/social issues are nothing but abstractions that you've read in books it is probably more comfortable to live your life as a model citizen with all the 'reactionary' baggage that includes. I think that's called privilege.



Calling lifestylism on this is not a cop out at all, this is lifestylism of the worst sorts. If an individual enjoys playing a video game like grand theft auto, is this enough to cast suspicion that perhaps they condone any of the stereotypes/indiscriminate violence portrayed?

I don't know if you're being serious here I'll give you a chance to edit your post to come up with an analogy that is actually accurate.

[Art Vandelay]

There is a difference between the various media things you've listed here. Mainstream news sources often cover facts on breaking news and once the opinion/discussion pieces begin it changes over in tone. Liberal comedy 'news' is backlogged news of interest to liberals with a specifically liberal spin to it, at least the vast majority of it especially the case with these two shows. I am critically reading into (asking questions) as to why radicals watch various shows, participate in certain actions or events, read certain texts, laugh at certain jokes, so on and so forth. Regarding acceptable news for radicals I already stated that I'm not interested in policing what folks watch and I already stated what this means and what it doesn't mean.

Yes I am aware of that, my point entirely is that you are more then likely reading far too into it, on this occasion. As far as I'm aware, outside of a few misguided and ill informed people on the 1st page, no one has argued the joke was acceptable/in good taste/funny. Its been outright condemned.


If there is a piece on something that I find relevant I may either watch the video clip of it or read responses to it. This is the penny at the bottom of the sewage run off. I am always disappointed.

And this is in no way some sort of barometer by which to judge your politics. Likewise, if someone happens to watch the cr for a laugh/since they see it on/cause they're bored/etc..it isn't enough information about them to make some sort of accurate appraisal of their politics.


when politics/social issues are nothing but abstractions that you've read in books it is probably more comfortable to live your life as a model citizen with all the 'reactionary' baggage that includes. I think that's called privilege.

Who are you calling a model citizen? I ask, just so were clear. And I've certainly not attempted to deny my privilege in comparison to others and I think your point is a valid one, but having said that you can't simply dismiss what I'm saying as 'privilege.' I'm more then willing for you to point out how me condemning the joke in question is reflective of privilege? Or is it simply because I refuse to stop watching the show, regardless of this incident, which is reflective of privilege? Cause to me all that is reflective of, is not being immersed in the worst form of lifestylism, thinking that the decision to boycott the cr, would somehow be indicative of my politics or make any sort of difference.


I don't know if you're being serious here I'll give you a chance to edit your post to come up with an analogy that is actually accurate.

Yes I was being serious. If its a bad analogy, its because I'm genuinely confused as to what you are trying to say here. Either what one chooses to watch on t.v. is somehow reflective of their politics, or it isn't. You seem to be implying the former, while referencing vague notions of someone's reasoning for watching a show like cr/ds/cbc/whatever. I've given you 3 reasonings (for a laugh, happen to see it on, they're bored) and I don't see any compelling argument as to why that is reflective of liberal politics. You're more than willing to critique that, but I'm not going to concede a point which I consider to be politically bankrupt, while being dismissed as 'privileged.'

[Ele'ill]

And this is in no way some sort of barometer by which to judge your politics. Likewise, if someone happens to watch the cr for a laugh/since they see it on/cause they're bored/etc..it isn't enough information about them to make some sort of accurate appraisal of their politics.

I haven't been talking about casually browsing or casually watching a show as in 'it came on and is now background noise'. I am talking about watching a tv show.




Who are you calling a model citizen? I ask, just so were clear. And I've certainly not attempted to deny my privilege in comparison to others and I think your point is a valid one, but having said that you can't simply dismiss what I'm saying as 'privilege.' I'm more then willing for you to point out how me condemning the joke in question is reflective of privilege? Or is it simply because I refuse to stop watching the show, regardless of this incident, which is reflective of privilege? Cause to me all that is reflective of, is not being immersed in the worst form of lifestylism, thinking that the decision to boycott the cr, would somehow be indicative of my politics or make any sort of difference.

I'm really not sure why you have flipped the 'spin everything' switch. This was your original comment:


Because not everything has to constantly be political?

It does when you are directly effected by the politics. My comment about privilege was directed at this concept. Where folks can watch abhorrent shit and enjoy it and then later on talk about how bad abhorrent shit is 'because that's what they're supposed to do' as in detached from the notion that various struggles are real.






Yes I was being serious. If its a bad analogy, its because I'm genuinely confused as to what you are trying to say here. Either what one chooses to watch on t.v. is somehow reflective of their politics, or it isn't. You seem to be implying the former, while referencing vague notions of someone's reasoning for watching a show like cr/ds/cbc/whatever. I've given you 3 reasonings (for a laugh, happen to see it on, they're bored) and I don't see any compelling argument as to why that is reflective of liberal politics. You're more than willing to critique that, but I'm not going to concede a point which I consider to be politically bankrupt, while being dismissed as 'privileged.'

again, i'm not interested in policing what people watch but for someone to watch certain shows for enjoyment of the social and political observations being thrown out (yes, both of those shows are liberal, period. also talking about shows like tosh.0 and such) and then expect to be exempt from some raised eyebrows, critical questioning, etc.. demonstrates a bit of cluelessness, perhaps privilege.

[RedWaves]

I never assumed those shows were meant to be taken seriously. Colbert mostly makes fun of everything on Fox News.

[Sabot Cat]

I never assumed those shows were meant to be taken seriously. Colbert mostly makes fun of everything on Fox News.

You can be joking whilst being discriminatory in your rhetoric, and you can be tangentially oppressive to certain groups of people even if it's not the main subject matter of your piece or routine. Both of these are actually fairly common, unfortunately.

[Art Vandelay]

I haven't been talking about casually browsing or casually watching a show as in 'it came on and is now background noise'. I am talking about watching a tv show.

But what I'm referring to is not simply 'oh this t.v. show came on and is now background noise.' I might as well use myself as an example: when I work during weekdays, I get off work at 10:30 pm most nights. By that point in the night, the guy I work with is usually asleep or entertaining himself, so I'm left to read a book/watch t.v./whatever. The daily show is usually on from 10-1030 and I watch it a couple time a week since not much else is on in that slot. It has nothing to do with me thinking they make any sort of cogent political arguments, or even that it is an overly funny show; its merely to kill time as I count down the last half hour of my shift. You seem to posit that this is a basis for questioning my politics. That's fine for you to do, but you aren't really putting forth any persuasive argument as to why that is a valid position to have. On the contrary, to me, all you are showcasing is the fact that you've clearly gone off the deep end when it comes to fetishization of lifestyle choices. I'm not arguing that one's political convictions are entirely independent of the things they enjoy, that would be absurd, but you'll have to put forth an argument of alot more substance to convince me of this alleged correlation.


It does when you are directly effected by the politics. My comment about privilege was directed at this concept. Where folks can watch abhorrent shit and enjoy it and then later on talk about how bad abhorrent shit is 'because that's what they're supposed to do' as in detached from the notion that various struggles are real.

Yes I totally agree with that. In fact, that would totally be an example of my privilege. As a cis-gender male, I don't have to feel the sting of being the butt of jokes, centered around my gender identity. In fact you raised a really good point (one I didn't ever think of before), of how it many ways it isn't even necessarily the initial joke which would effect one the most, but rather the fact that it can bring up past experiences, where similar comments were made or even made and accompanied with violence. I also agree that being able to laugh at that type of shit, then go back and say 'oh yeah, wait, that was totally discriminatory and wrong' would certainly be reflective of privilege and would make me question the sincerity of their political convictions, regardless if they identify with radical politics subjectively.But having said that, when this argument is directed at me in this case, its a total strawman. I didn't find the joke funny and wouldn't of laughed had I seen it. So again, I don't see this supposed correlation you seem to be alluding to.


again, i'm not interested in policing what people watch but for someone to watch certain shows for enjoyment of the social and political observations being thrown out (yes, both of those shows are liberal, period. also talking about shows like tosh.0 and such) and then expect to be exempt from some raised eyebrows, critical questioning, etc.. demonstrates a bit of cluelessness, perhaps privilege.

Well first off Daniel Tosh is beyond a jackass and I don't think his show is anyway comparable (in terms of content) to the ones in question. I don't deny those shows are liberal, that much is quite obvious. I guess my point is simply that liberals can still be funny/entertaining at times.

[Art Vandelay]

I never assumed those shows were meant to be taken seriously. Colbert mostly makes fun of everything on Fox News.

The point is the ways in which the normalization of discriminatory attitudes/comments towards specific groups, helps to reinforce systemic oppression.

[Alonso Quijano]

In their defence:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-september-27-2011/areola-51

The show makes of fun of trans-panic. I think that the digusting joke in the opening post is just like many, let's say, homophobic jokes coming from leftists - the result of not thinking and not realising that it hurts people.

It should be brought up to Jon's attention, it's perfectly right to demand an apology - but I don't think there's some ideology or bigotry the motivates any transphobic jokes.

As for how Colbert, who is a parody character, helps to "normalise" discriminatory comments:
Here he claims it's wrong to be antisemitic, as the modern Republican should attack gays and muslims:
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/401675/november-07-2011/blood-in-the-water---larry-taylor-s-anti-semitic-slur

This is an attack on Jewish holiday "in the name" of Christian people, and towards the end parodises the "you can't trust Jews":
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/429620/october-08-2013/thanksgiving-under-attack---hanukkah

And "Russia's Olympics are endangered by homosexuals who insist on existing during them" lampoons homophobia much more than it noramlises it, in my opinion:
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/430729/november-20-2013/sport-report---the-winter-games-and-russia-s-anti-gay-pride

[Orange Juche]

In their defence:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-september-27-2011/areola-51

The show makes of fun of trans-panic. I think that the digusting joke in the opening post is just like many, let's say, homophobic jokes coming from leftists - the result of not thinking and not realising that it hurts people.

It should be brought up to Jon's attention, it's perfectly right to demand an apology - but I don't think there's some ideology or bigotry the motivates any transphobic jokes.

As for how Colbert, who is a parody character, helps to "normalise" discriminatory comments:
Here he claims it's wrong to be antisemitic, as the modern Republican should attack gays and muslims:
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/401675/november-07-2011/blood-in-the-water---larry-taylor-s-anti-semitic-slur

This is an attack on Jewish holiday "in the name" of Christian people, and towards the end parodises the "you can't trust Jews":
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/429620/october-08-2013/thanksgiving-under-attack---hanukkah

And "Russia's Olympics are endangered by homosexuals who insist on existing during them" lampoons homophobia much more than it noramlises it, in my opinion:
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/430729/november-20-2013/sport-report---the-winter-games-and-russia-s-anti-gay-pride

1) Mocking transphobia in instance B does not atone for one's act of transphobia in instance A. So the video at the top... yeah, and?

2) I don't really care about motives, I give a shit about outcomes. Actions. You don't have to be vitriolic to be a sexist pig, or a racist, or anything else - you just have to actually be those things. They're a product of a society where trans-people, particularly trans-women are made to be a joke as a concept. But they are in a role where they have the responsibility to not propagate a mindset that causes great distress and pain for trans individuals. Yet they do. So, fuck their motives. If they visibly apologize and make an open statement countering it, then we can go from there. They haven't done that.

3) The site I linked explains directly how Colbert is not using his parody character's perspective to mock the right wing view of the trans community. You should read it. He wasn't "normalizing" anything with his "Adam's apple" comment (it was actually "The Word" segment stating it), or constantly using the word "tranny" (and I doubt you'd be anything but opposed if he used equivalent racial epithets.)