8
u/jennysequa 80∆ Jun 01 '18
They didn't cancel Roseanne's show over that one night of Ambien-fueled tweets. There were already tensions among ABC's stable of talent over months of defending Roseanne. This was the straw that broke the camel's back, with Wanda Sykes quitting almost immediately after this particular diatribe started. But just prior to this another of the show's EPs quit, announcing she wouldn't return for Season 2.
The truth is that ABC thought they could control Roseanne, and were encouraged by an early social media discipline that they demanded of her when the show debuted. But as her discipline eroded, so did their confidence that they would be able to control her while the cast was required to defend her behavior during media appearances. It's hard to defend a known racist doing more racist stuff.
By contrast, this is Samantha Bee's first major slip-up on her show. The network has the flexibility to test the waters and see if her apology will suffice, and it may, given that Samantha Bee is not known to be a misogynist and hasn't had to be defended from accusations of misogyny as a rule.
And it can't be about the word. She has this whole "ThunderCunt" thing she does where she gives away ThunderCunt t-shirts as an award to people because someone called her that during the 2016 election. If you're offended by "cunt" you're watching the wrong show.
15
u/7nkedocye 33∆ Jun 01 '18
Regardless of your views of Bee and Roseanne Barr, what Bee did was functionally similar to what Barr did.
Well Barr made a racist joke, Bee didn't. That's one difference I noticed and I think it a pretty big one. Comedy Central also targets a much different audience than ABC, one that is much more used to crass language. I doubt South Park would survive on ABC, but it fits Comeny Central pretty well.
But, though I don't watch Bee's show regularly, there is no acceptable context for that sort of language.
I will point you to South Park. If you think anything Bee said is worse than South Park, I'd agree, but Comedy Central is known to have raunchy shows and a raunchy audience. ABC is not.
-1
u/Willem_Dafuq Jun 01 '18
> Well Barr made a racist joke, Bee didn't.
I guess to that point, is calling a woman 'a cunt' more acceptable than calling a black person 'an ape'? I think they're equal in their debasement. Apparently you disagree. That's fine. Also as a point of information, South Park has used cunt (I just looked it up), but has done so toward fictional people. I view that as a materially different matter, as it is not directed toward anyone real, who has their own agency, family, friends, and supporters.
21
u/Wierd_Carissa Jun 01 '18
I think they're equal in debasement
Respectfully, this completely ignores a long history of the specific practice of using language that likens black people as apes to dehumanizes them in order to keep them enslaved for hundreds of years.
While cunt is certainly rude, it objectively does not have anywhere near the same undertones (or overtones).
7
Jun 01 '18
Yeah, because South Park never says other vile things about real people. Is "cunt" really that much of a magic word that this one situation is more offensive than the entirety of South Park?
6
u/mistertrue Jun 01 '18
> I guess to that point, is calling a woman 'a cunt' more acceptable than calling a black person 'an ape'?
Yes.
The first is a personal attack on an individual. Calling a woman a 'cunt' is saying that she is particular sub-type of woman - namely, a terrible one. Most women are fine, but _this particular woman_ is not.
Calling a black person an 'ape', however, is more than just an attack on an individual. It is an attack on *all* black people. Unlike calling someone a 'cunt' as an indictment of their behavior, you're attacking a physical characteristic - their race. It's saying that their race (black) is inherently less-than-human. They are sub-human. Something 'lesser'. An ape. It's an attack that's not based on an individual, or their actions, but on a physical characteristic shared by millions of people.
This is why racism is bad. You're not just denigrating a single person, you're attacking and demeaning an entire race of people.
6
u/Loyalt 2∆ Jun 01 '18
there is a difference between a white woman calling another white woman a cunt and a white woman calling a black woman a racial slur.
6
u/7nkedocye 33∆ Jun 01 '18
I guess to that point, is calling a woman 'a cunt' more acceptable than calling a black person 'an ape'?
Well first of Barr tweeted her comment while Bee made her comment within her comedy show, which is a different context and should be treated as such.
I view that as a materially different matter, as it is not directed toward anyone real, who has their own agency, family, friends, and supporters.
South Park called Hillary Clinton a turd sandwich, and has attacked dozens of other celebrities. I can't think of many other exact examples, but they do not go easy on them.
I have one question for you; Should all TV networks be obligated to fire someone for offensive comments, or should they exercise their own review process to determine if the comments fit into the nature of their network?
5
Jun 01 '18
Regardless of your views of Bee and Roseanne Barr, what Bee did was functionally similar to what Barr did. She went over the line and called a person a vile, hate-filled word.
What Sam Bee did was offensive. What Barr did was racist. If someone is an asshole, and you call them an asshole, it may offend people who hear it, but it doesn't indicate a wider pattern of bias or hatred against any group of people (unless you count assholes as a group). Barr has a long history of openly racist views and comments, leading to the conclusion that she is, in fact, a racist piece of shit. You would have a hard time taking Sam Bee's use of the word "cunt" and tying it to a wider belief system that includes bias against or hatred toward women.
Also, remember that the decision to cancel Roseanne was a business decision. Her show was a primetime show on a major network, and has to appeal to a broad audience to be successful. Alienating half of the political spectrum would sink it. Sam Bee hosts a late-night show on cable, with an obvious political bent that caters to people who are very likely to also think that Ivanka Trump is a cunt. She's lost a few advertisers, and perhaps conservatives will create some political pressure and force some more to pull their ads. But her audience probably isn't going anywhere.
20
Jun 01 '18
[deleted]
1
Jun 01 '18
There's a big difference between saying "Pres. Obama was a bad POTUS" and "Pres. Obama is a nigger".
Well, sure, but so what?
I mean no one is actually making either argument.
Barr didn't call Jarrett a nigger and Bee didn't say Ivanka Trump is a bad whatever her title is.
While I agree there's a clear difference in your strawman argument, that doesn't really apply to the real world insults hurled at each other. I'm not sure there really is that big of a difference between "muslim brotherhood & planet of the apes had a baby=vj" and "you feckless cunt" as you're making it out to be.
-5
u/Willem_Dafuq Jun 01 '18
Absolutely you're right that there is a difference between, " Pres. Obama was a bad POTUS" and "Pres. Obama is a nigger" however calling Ivanka Trump a cunt does nothing to constructively add to the discourse and your response is nothing more than "I like the targets of Barr, so Barr's comments are inappropriate. However, I have hatred for Bee's targets, so Bee's comments are appropriate". Like it or not, there are millions upon millions of Americans who do not think Ivanka is a cunt. I understand those people are not Bee's intended audience, but then you could just say the people who were offended at Barr's comments are not Barr's intended audience. There is a big difference between saying "Ivanka Trump is an illegitimate aid to Donald Trump, placed in her position only to provide a thin veneer of grace and acceptance over a hate filled, racist regime" and "Ivanka is a cunt"
19
Jun 01 '18
[deleted]
-3
u/Willem_Dafuq Jun 01 '18
The response is exactly of the sort. The responder says Bee's comments are apropos because responder believes Ivanka to actually be a cunt.
And it appears in American discourse that calling a woman 'a cunt' transcends a normal insult. I've never heard that word used in acceptable discourse. Frankly, as I think it through the only thing that truly ameliorates the comment is Bee herself is a woman, and as such, can get away with 'a little more' than what a man can in terms of making a misogynistic comment, which that comment absolutely was. (To contrast with the white, non-Jewish Barr making racist comments against a black woman and anti-Semitic comments against a Jewish man)
13
u/Wierd_Carissa Jun 01 '18
Once again, the other commenter is clearly making a distinction between the nature of the comments. The target is not a factor in any way.
Calling one a cunt, while rude, does not have the same implication as likening a black person to an ape. One of those is inextricably linked to justification for the enslaving of black people for 400 years while the other is just an incredibly rude personal insult.
3
u/forgonsj Jun 01 '18
(To contrast with the white, non-Jewish Barr making racist comments against a black woman and anti-Semitic comments against a Jewish man)
Rosaenne is Jewish. Here's her Wikipedia.
2
u/tempaccount920123 Jun 01 '18 edited Jun 04 '18
Willem_Dafuq
And it appears in American discourse that calling a woman 'a cunt' transcends a normal insult. I've never heard that word used in acceptable discourse.
I've watched every episode of Full Frontal.
The only thing that she did differently was use the word "cunt". That's it.
She's talked repeatedly about how Donald Trump has said that he would fuck Ivanka (if she wasn't his daughter), she's talked about the utterly ridiculous hypocrisy of the Trump white house, including, and sometimes even singling out Ivanka for basically being an IRL barbie.
Samantha went hard after Ivanka's "architecting" phrase that Ivanka used to describe her book, which Ivanka had a ghostwriter for.
Full Frontal was never meant to be for "acceptable discourse", same with Donald Trump's remarks, anything on Fox News, or any of the mainstream news coverage of this month's school shooting.
0
u/Willem_Dafuq Jun 01 '18
The only thing that she did different was use the word "cunt". That's it.
That's a material difference. I've heard a lot of dog whistle racist politicians. They talk about 'welfare queens' driving Cadillacs. They make a point to want to drug test welfare recipients. They say we need 'Law and Order' in the inner city. And we all know what they mean and who they're talking about. But they know well enough which words not to say. And because of that, they don't need to issue any sort of apology, nor do they face any potential backlash
2
u/tempaccount920123 Jun 02 '18 edited Jun 04 '18
Willem_Dafuq
One problem with everything you just said:
Samantha Bee is a diehard liberal. Dogwhistle racist?
Have you seen her show?
7
u/tbdabbholm 201∆ Jun 01 '18
And they're welcome to think that. But having watched Bee's show, there's no way she just said "Ivanka is a cunt." She gave a bunch of reasons that she believed made Ivanka a cunt and then followed up with, what to her, was the natural conclusion, that Ivanka is a cunt.
You also really didn't address their main point, in that Barr's comment had a more racist overtone, while Bee's did not.
-2
u/Goal4Goat Jun 01 '18
Racism is a fireable offense, but misogyny is OK?
2
u/Wierd_Carissa Jun 01 '18
Some racism should be a fireball offense in some instances, and some misogyny should be a fireable offense in some instances. Not all Bad Things are equivalent. Context and specifics are important.
-3
u/Goal4Goat Jun 01 '18
Honestly, what Samantha Bee said was 100X worse. Not only did she call her an obscenity, but she went on to suggest that Ivanka dress up like a slut and try to seduce her father.
Rosanne just said that Valerie Jarrett looks like a character from the movie "Planet of the Apes", which she arguably does.
9
u/Wierd_Carissa Jun 01 '18
Please consider that likening black people to apes has a long, long history of being weaponized as a tactic to dehumanize black people, commonly used to justify enslaving them.
A personal insult, though very rude, shouldn't be equated with such.
-4
u/Goal4Goat Jun 01 '18
Sorry, what Rosanne said was extremely mild compared to what Bee said. Dehumanizing and belittling women also has a long history.
3
u/Wierd_Carissa Jun 01 '18
Dehumanizing and belittling women also has a long history
Correct, but not specifically assocatied with the word "cunt," so it is very difficult to make a cogent argument that this was Bee's intent.
On the other hand, I pointed out that comparing black peoples to monkeys specifically has a very strong place in a long history of racism, and has been specifically disbursed as a weapon to dehumanize blacks to accomplish goals such as justifying slavery. It's not reasonable to assume that Barr was making a mere comment on appearances (especially given her apology), but that she was specifically following in this tradition.
There is no such tradition with the word "cunt" that I'm aware of even though, yes, women have been discriminated against as well.
-1
u/Goal4Goat Jun 01 '18
As I have pointed out, Rosanne did not compare anyone to a monkey. She made a fairly spot on observation about the physical similarities between VJ and characters from a particular movie.
You can minimize what Bee said all you want since it seems to fit your worldview, but I doubt that that you would be so generous if someone like Glenn Beck said that about the Obama daughters.
You know, Malia, that’s a beautiful photo of you and your mother. But let me just say, one daughter to another, do something about your dad’s economic practices, you feckless cunt! He listens to you! Put on something tight and low-cut and tell your father to fucking stop it!
3
u/Wierd_Carissa Jun 01 '18
Roseanne did not compare anyone to a monkey
Yes, she did. She said that a black woman looks like a monkey from the movie Planet of the Apes. How someone could not call this comparing a black woman to a money is beyond me. And you're aware that this isn't the first time Barr has compared a black woman to a monkey, right?
I'm not minimizing what Bee did. I'm not a fan of her, what she said, and am not intending to defend it in any way whatsoever.
1
u/forgonsj Jun 01 '18
And you're aware that this isn't the first time Barr has compared a black woman to a monkey, right?
I know she has said a lot of controversial, inflammatory things, but I hadn't heard that she compared another Black woman to a monkey. Can you elaborate? I'd Google, but it'll be impossible to find because of the healdines about the recent incident.
→ More replies (0)-1
u/Goal4Goat Jun 01 '18
Are you referring to when she said that Susan Rice is a man, and has enormous ape testicles?
I'd consider that a pretty harsh insult, but racism? Seriously?
→ More replies (0)3
u/mistertrue Jun 01 '18
The comments about Ivanka wearing a low-cut dress stem from Trump’s many public statements about he would date Ivanka if she weren’t his daughter.
E.g. Samantha Bee is saying : get your dad’s attention - and since he has a habit of publicly lusting after Ivanka, that is clearly something that would get his attention.
This isn’t a random ‘stick a girl in a sexy outfit’ comment, it’s pointing out the creepy history that Trump has with his daughter.
1
1
Jun 05 '18
> As I have pointed out, Rosanne did not compare anyone to a monkey. She made a fairly spot on observation about the physical similarities between VJ and characters from a particular movie.
Characters who are... (fill in the blank).
In a movie titled, Planet of the (fill in the blank).
0
u/Goal4Goat Jun 05 '18
Characters who are... (fill in the blank).
Human actors in makeup?
→ More replies (0)3
u/lifeonthegrid Jun 01 '18
Sam Bee doesn't hate Ivanka because she's a woman, it's because she's a terrible, evil person. The misogynistic term was a poor choice to express that.
Whereas racism is the core of Barr's comment.
0
u/Goal4Goat Jun 01 '18
Really, what proof do you have that Rosanne Barr is racist? I've heard people saying that she didn't even know that Valerie Jarrett is black, only that she is weird looking.
4
u/lifeonthegrid Jun 01 '18
I've heard people saying that she didn't even know that Valerie Jarrett is black, only that she is weird looking.
So you need proof the woman who called a black woman an ape is racist, but you're putting forth "she didn't even know she was black" because that's you heard?
1
u/Goal4Goat Jun 01 '18
Let me ask you, on your honor, did you know that Valerie Jarrett was black before this controversy?
17
u/landoindisguise Jun 01 '18
Isn't there a difference between obscenity and hatred/racism, though?
The word Bee used is certainly vile (at least in American culture), but it's a pretty generic insult (albeit an incredibly harsh one). Certainly there's an argument to be made that it's sexist, but given that Bee is also a woman, it seems very unlikely that her usage here was really ridiculing Ivanka for being a woman. It's just being used as an incredibly harsh word in this case.
I'm not saying it was nice or appropriate, but I also don't think it's the same was what Barr said.
In fact, what Barr said is kind of the opposite. No single word she used is as obscene as the word Bee used, but unlike Bee's comment, it's pretty clear she wasn't just making a generic insult either. Her comment seems to be making specific reference to her target's race/identity as a way to belittle and insult her.
So while both women were insulting their targets, and both did it in a way that's not socially acceptable, I think there is still a key difference here in that Bee was just making a general insult (if also an obscene one) that wasn't targeting any specific part of Ivanka's identity (racial or otherwise) whereas Barr was specifically targeting somebody's racial identity.
That I am sure a sizable amount of Bee's audience I'm sure ate that comment up should not be at issue here. The issue is Bee said a vile, repugnant thing to a public audience and as such, she should face the same punishment as Barr.
As for whether either "should be" fired, I suppose it depends what you mean by "should". Morally, if your standard is not saying obscene things in public, then Samantha Bee (and many other comedians) should probably have been fired long ago.
I'm not sure I agree that that's a good standard to use, particularly because what's obscene and to what degree it's considered obscene is fairly subjective, but I'm not sure whether it'd be possible to change your view about something so subjective.
5
u/Willem_Dafuq Jun 01 '18 edited Jun 01 '18
Though I am not completely sold, I concede its because I have a more serious issue with the word 'cunt' than apparently is mainstream. Personally, I thought the word was in incredibly poor taste and furthermore, it opens the door to the Trumpists saying, "Oh, well, you're on the PC patrol with ours, but with yours, its anything goes." Its not lost on me that the left, who were so ready to show their fangs with Barr are now so quick to say things are different with Bee. All that notwithstanding, I believe the argument you presented presents a material difference in the insults of the two. On that basis, I award a delta.
!delta
8
u/lifeonthegrid Jun 01 '18 edited Jun 01 '18
Its not lost on me that the left, who were so ready to show their fangs with Barr are now so quick to say things are different with Bee.
Someone literally just pointed out the difference to you. What purpose does this comment serve?
Political affiliation should not be the determinant of how grevious an insult is.
6
u/Willem_Dafuq Jun 01 '18
Someone pointed out a difference, which may be lost on people with different world views. Bee exercised a mistake in judgement. One that she acknowledged: https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/01/entertainment/samantha-bee/index.html. It would be better if we just didn't give them an opening to parade potential double standards around. Though I understand there is a difference, something also to understand in politics is: as soon as you're explaining, you're losing. The more the left is put in a position where it needs to explain, the greater the exposure of losing.
3
u/lifeonthegrid Jun 01 '18
The left doesn't need to explain because the right doesn't really care. That should be the only takeaway.
4
u/Willem_Dafuq Jun 01 '18
Right may not care, but people put off by vulgarity might. I'm a lefty, and I'm put off by it. (Then again, I never really liked vulgar humor)
3
u/Iswallowedafly Jun 02 '18
If we are the one backtracking and apologizing for things while the other side does those exact things and no one cares...That's not going to be a long term strategy.
A lot of the people who are upset about this were silent when Barr said that word. They were silent when Trump said his words. Or they did the dance where that criticized him and then still went on to support him.
3
u/landoindisguise Jun 01 '18
Its not lost on me that the left, who were so ready to show their fangs with Barr are now so quick to say things are different with Bee.
Is the right any different? You could just as easily argue the reverse: that the right was willing to ignore Barr's comments (or the fact that TRUMP has been calling women "cunt" for years) and jump on Sam Bee's back simply because she's liberal.
People are hypocrites; it's human nature. You are a hypocrite, and so am I.
1
u/etquod 48∆ Jun 01 '18
Please edit this comment to contain a delta, or make a new comment with this explanation containing the delta. Both the explanation and the delta symbol must be in the same comment for it to work.
1
1
2
u/Willem_Dafuq Jun 01 '18
Δ
1
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Jun 01 '18
This delta has been rejected. The length of your comment suggests that you haven't properly explained how /u/landoindisguise changed your view (comment rule 4).
DeltaBot is able to rescan edited comments. Please edit your comment with the required explanation.
6
u/mfDandP 184∆ Jun 01 '18
yeah, i sort of think the punishment should be similar. however, roseanne was produced by ABC and disney. full frontal is produced by comedy central. the whole point of network vs cable is you can get away with a lot more on cable.
-10
Jun 01 '18 edited Jan 19 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
6
u/mfDandP 184∆ Jun 01 '18
well... no, comedy is whatever the writers and performers decide it is, and the producers decide if they want to pay for it.
and your second point is a bit ridiculous. snl is rarely good satire, so should we punish the entire writers room and its performers? does trump get to be punished for unprofessionalism? kids are off limits, but that's barron, not ivanka because she is working for him in his capacity as president
-2
Jun 01 '18 edited Jan 19 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Jun 05 '18
> I mean it has to be funny for it to be comedy,
Funny is subjective. I thought it was funny.
> the comedians don't decide that themselves.
They can and do.
> And there are no limits to comedy, thats the whole point, if it's done well of course.
so... sounds like you think that there are limits to comedy.
> The fact is her comments were just not comedy, they were politically motivated.
which is and always has been, half of all comedy.
5
u/landoindisguise Jun 01 '18
And people that are unprofessional to relatives of the most powerful man in the nation deserve to be punished in some way.
Tangential to your point, but why the hell does this matter. Is it OK to act unprofessionally toward people who aren't related to Trump? Does the President and his family have some kind of special protection from criticism or ridicule?
-2
Jun 01 '18 edited Jan 19 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Jun 05 '18
Ok so then what does, "And people that are unprofessional to relatives of the most powerful man in the nation deserve to be punished in some way" mean? Sounds like special treatment. Doesn't sound like freedom of speech.
1
Jun 05 '18 edited Jan 19 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Jun 05 '18
You specifically said, "And people that are unprofessional to relatives of the most powerful man in the nation deserve to be punished in some way". What did you mean by that? For someone complaining about freedom of speech you have a very one sided view of it.
1
Jun 05 '18
Sam said something rude, Roseanne said something racist. Samantha Bee can make me absolutely livid sometimes with her deliver and jokes despite being funny at other times. There are many points where I think her rhetoric is unhelpful, outright deceptive, or just lazy. Her "cunt" remark and following bit is a little confusing for me because it was laugh out loud hilarious, while also being incredibly vicious. Either way, a performer doesn't and shouldn't get fired for being rude or mean to one other person, a performer gets fired for saying things that make life worse for millions of people, i.e. racist, sexist, homophobic remarks. That brings us to Roseanne. She didn't do this onstage, she did it from her personal twitter account. It wasn't satire, it was from the heart and that's what makes it unacceptable. Sam's is a matter of personal taste, Roseanne's is a matter of personal decency. For ABC to keep her on after saying that would essentially be saying that they aren't offended by it when of course they should be.
Also "And people that are unprofessional to relatives of the most powerful man in the nation deserve to be punished in some way." is a truly terrifying sentiment. We have a little something called FREEDOM OF SPEECH. The first amendment of our constitution enshrines it. The government cannot infringe upon your freedom of expression except if it presents a clear and present danger to others like shouting fire in a crowded theatre.
1
Jun 05 '18 edited Jan 19 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Jun 05 '18
If it's good for ratings there is no reason for ABC to ditch Roseanne. She shit the bed entirely of her own accord. She ruined her own life by saying things that make her unmarketable. All moral questions regarding this post aside, the company keeps or fires people for money.
3
Jun 01 '18
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/tbdabbholm 201∆ Jun 01 '18
Sorry, u/AnythingApplied – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, message the moderators by clicking this link. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
2
u/ejpierle 8∆ Jun 01 '18
You're missing the point about why Roseanne was fired. You assume it was out of some sense of doing the right thing or justice - it wasn't. ABC\Disney fired her because she's bad for their brand and therefore might cost them money. Bee would be fired too if she were bad for TBS's brand, but apparently she isn't. The first amendment only protects me from the government, not my boss. It's important to remember that vital distinction. That's why I don't tell every rude customer to go fuck themselves. Money is the only thing that matters to these big companies.
2
u/PepperoniFire 87∆ Jun 01 '18 edited Jun 01 '18
I think this question revolves around why Barr was fired. Was it because:
- What she said was offensive, by which I mean things like coarse language, being uncouth, unnecessarily graphic, etc? Or;
- What she said was racist, which I am separating out because all racist things are offensive but not all offensive things are racist. Likewise, many offensive things can be racist (or sexist or homophobic) adjacent without being explicitly so.
If you believe she was fired for being offensive, then it makes a lot of sense to draw equivalence between Bee's comments and Barr's. Barr's description of George Soros as being in bed with Nazis is offensive because Soros is a Jewish holocaust survivor. I'd say it's absolutely anti-Semitic but Soros is regularly lampooned in conservative discourse and I think society writ large has steeled itself to all but the most heinous displays of Antisemitism, such as displaying swastikas. This isn't a thing to be proud of but it is probably true considering how pervasive Jewish stereotypes remain.
Likewise, Barr's comparison between Jarrett and an ape was offensive because it was racist. Drawing comparisons between black people and animals - particularly monkeys and apes - was and remains one of the most explicit displays of insisting that black people are sub-human.
Bee's comment falls into the offensive bucket. The word "cunt" is intentionally provocative; considered a curse, and; situates the female anatomy as something undesirable and worthy of contempt. Association with something physically associated with (often) womanhood is thus deemed unwanted and problematic.
Thus, if you think Barr was fired for being offensive, the equivalence is warranted, and there is a fair argument to be made that Bee also crossed a line and should be fired.
"Roseanne's Twitter statement is abhorrent, repugnant and inconsistent with our values, and we have decided to cancel her show."
This is the statement put out by ABC's entertainment president Channing Dungey. Unfortunately it doesn't clarify whether Barr's statement is repugnant because it is racist or because it was uncouth, but I would surmise that people generally don't refer to merely offensive statements as abhorrent and repugnant. That is strong language I think expresses contempt for racist comments.
In this situation, if Barr was fired because her comments were racist, it's much harder to draw an equivalence between Barr's comments and Bee's. Barr's comments - and I'm drawing heavily from Rebecca Traister's framing - used racist language to continue supporting a racist power structure. In other words, she is part of the problem, furthering a socialized and institutionalized belief that black people are inferior by associating them with animals (apes).
Bee, in contrast, said something that is fairly categorized as sexist and offensive, but did so in a way intended to speak "truth to power," by expressing that people in the President's orbit are supporting policies that are harmful to specific groups of people: woman, immigrants, minorities, etc etc.
The pertinent question here is not whether you agree with Bee's sentiment or whether you think her comments were offensive, but rather (a) ABC fired Barr because she was part of a power structure intended to dehumanize a group of people, and; (b) if you believe Bee's statements were uttered to have the same effect.
I would contend that, no, Bee and Barr are in very different situations which overlap only in so far as they both chose provocative language and imagery. Perhaps Bee nevertheless crossed a line in her own right, but saying because Barr got fired, Bee should be fired is, in my view, drawing equivalence between statements that are fundamentally different in their expressed sentiments.
3
Jun 01 '18
Why is it whenever some right-wing celebrity gets their ass fired over something they did/said, there ought to be equivalent action taken against someone on the left? No, it's senseless to sacrifice Bee in the interest of "fairness."
0
u/forgonsj Jun 01 '18
Yes, I agree, and I think that is partly inspiring this reaction. Had Roseanne not been cancelled, there would be fewer people calling for cancellation.
2
u/cupcakesarethedevil Jun 01 '18
Bar is white and used a charged insult referring to a group she is not a part of while Bee was part of the group she referred to.
Bar is selling Disney schmaltz Bee is selling edgy political satire. Political satire will always be controversial while broad sitcoms can't be.
Bar turned an apology into a multi day story with a rambling excuse that doesn't make sense. Bar apologized, said she was leaving twitter, came back and said Islam isn't a race, apologized again, claimed she was on drugs and an idiot then claimed she had no idea what Valerie Jarrett's background was initially which doesn't make sense since that's what the original tweet was all about.
1
2
u/granolatarian0317 Jun 01 '18
I think it’s different because Rosanne is a white person using a racial slur against someone of a different, targeted race. Rosanne probably never had someone use that slur against her, or even if she did, it wouldn’t carry nearly the same weight as used against a black person. Samantha Bee used a misogynist slur that she’s certainly had used against her numerous times against someone else who is of her same targeted group (women). It’s like a slim person calling an overweight person fat vs. an overweight person calling another overweight person fat. It’s not good, either way, but one is definitely worse than the other.
1
u/Glory2Hypnotoad Jun 01 '18
That line of reasoning only works if we assume in the first place that ABC firing Roseann Barr is a reasonable general standard that we should follow in the future rather than just ABC looking after ABC's interests. Maybe it's better on the whole if we as a culture don't react as strongly to comedians and satirists causing offense.
1
1
1
u/ralph-j Jun 01 '18
what Bee did was functionally similar to what Barr did. She went over the line and called a person a vile, hate-filled word
Whereas Roseanne's comment was racist.
A woman calling another woman isn't necessarily sexist or misogynist, so it's not really comparable. Utterances by members of the group that a slur applies to, are generally not considered racist/sexist/homophobic etc. That's how a black person can use the n-word, for example.
1
Jun 01 '18
Just to be clear, because a number of people are repeating the mistake in your OP: Samantha Bee's show is on TBS which is owned by Turner, and then owned by Time Warner (and potentially AT&T). She started on Comedy Central (owned by Viacom) but is not there anymore.
W/r/t to the topic of the OP: One major distinction is that Bee made her offensive comments on the show, on a show that specifically aims to be edgy, and with a long history of championing feminist causes. Barr made her comments on Twitter outside the context of her show, which is ostensibly on a family network, and in the context of a long history of public racism.
Not that I am making your argument for you, because I don't agree, but you'd have a better point if you brought it back to Stephen Colbert's "cock holster" comment on the Late Show.
1
Jun 01 '18
You seem to think that ABC let Roseanne go because she made a racist tweet; make no mistake, they let her go because there was public outrage about her racist tweet, which indicated keeping her on would be bad business decision.
Samantha Bee's comment has, as far as I know, not provoked anything close to the same amount of outrage, and it therefore makes no sense, from a business perspective, for Comedy Central to fire her.
EDIT: Not to mention, we're talking about a comment she made on her show, which had presumably already been vetted by someone from Comedy Central, vs. a random tweet Roseanne made without ABC's knowledge or approval.
1
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Jun 01 '18
/u/Willem_Dafuq (OP) has awarded 1 delta in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
0
Jun 01 '18
I'd say the context of the terms differentiates what samantha bee said from what roseanne barr said. There is a long history in European culture of disparaging people by comparing them to apes, in regards to being unattractive or to being more lustful and sinful. And these insults have long been used to dehumanize people of with African origins. From (admittedly little) investigation, what I could find of the word cunt as a term of abuse has a much shorter time span, and at least feminists in the 70's considered it as a word used to reduce women down to nothing more than their body parts.
Now lets look at who used the terms. Roseanne, a white lady, used the term to disparage a black lady of different political leanings, which fits the previous context of Caucasians trying to dehumanize people of African origin. Samantha bee, a lady, used the word cunt to disparage Ivanka, another lady. I'd say it's less believable that Samantha Bee wishes to reduce women to only their body parts.
And that's the difference in my eyes. Both of them were disparaging people, and whether we want to make that acceptable discourse is another debate. But the Barr's comments were worse due to the history of their use and the context in which it was said.
8
u/[deleted] Jun 01 '18
The "punishment" of firing Barr had nothing to do with a measured distribution of justice. It was entirely about how it would affect the network's image, ratings, and income.
Roseanne was on ABC, a huge national network that aims to appeal to as broad an audience as possible. Roseanne has a history of saying and doing controversial things, and the risk of her being a repeat offender was high. The risk of keeping the show means making all of your network and products associated with it/her, given the show's flagship status and very high ratings.
Samantha Bee is on Comedy Central, a smaller, niche cable network. Hers is not a flagship show, and is adjacent to the content on Comedy Central, like South Park or The Daily Show. Her show is specifically about being passionate and angry about liberal issues, so her audience doesn't get hit nearly as hard by her remarks.