Originally Posted by EnderD_503 (Post 166381)

Is this kind of thing really necessary? Why throw in emasculating comments like this? Even if you believe the image is perpetuating something you do not support, stooping to what you believe to be a lower level is not the way to go about changing anything, imo. It perpetuates what appears to be the entire qualm you have with the video. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind, as they say.



All satire can be misconstrued as anti- whatever the subject matter happens to be. In some ways, that is part of the reflective point of satire. How many people do you think watched Borat and thought Sacha Baron Cohen was actually perpetuating sexism, racism, homophobia among other subjects he touched upon? The same has happened with nearly every satiric work that has ever come out, and it is because people fail to see the purpose of satire: to hold a mirror up to society, to overexaggerate and therefore make more visible its blatant hypocrisy.

And even if it was not meant as a satire by the original creator (which we still don't know yet, as far as I've seen), there is also the case of inadvertant satire that can function just as well toward that aim. Why not use it in such a manner, consequently stripping it of the power with which you believe it to be endowed?

For those interested, Slavoj Zizek actually talks about how such "jokes" or satires function, and may explain better than I currently am. It's a long clip and I understand most people don't want to get into the whole thing, but his overview of the example joke he uses starts at around 37:00 for those interested (the joke is used to support other arguments in the debate, but the whole debate does not centre around the use of jokes/satire as a tool toward illuminating social hypocrisy, so I don't want anyone to think the whole thing is about such jokes).

Originally Posted by EnderD_503 (Post 166381)

Is this kind of thing really necessary? Why throw in emasculating comments like this? Even if you believe the image is perpetuating something you do not support, stooping to what you believe to be a lower level is not the way to go about changing anything, imo. It perpetuates what appears to be the entire qualm you have with the video. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind, as they say.



All satire can be misconstrued as anti- whatever the subject matter happens to be. In some ways, that is part of the reflective point of satire. How many people do you think watched Borat and thought Sacha Baron Cohen was actually perpetuating sexism, racism, homophobia among other subjects he touched upon? The same has happened with nearly every satiric work that has ever come out, and it is because people fail to see the purpose of satire: to hold a mirror up to society, to overexaggerate and therefore make more visible its blatant hypocrisy.

And even if it was not meant as a satire by the original creator (which we still don't know yet, as far as I've seen), there is also the case of inadvertant satire that can function just as well toward that aim. Why not use it in such a manner, consequently stripping it of the power with which you believe it to be endowed?

For those interested, Slavoj Zizek actually talks about how such "jokes" or satires function, and may explain better than I currently am. It's a long clip and I understand most people don't want to get into the whole thing, but his overview of the example joke he uses starts at around 37:00 for those interested (the joke is used to support other arguments in the debate, but the whole debate does not centre around the use of jokes/satire as a tool toward illuminating social hypocrisy, so I don't want anyone to think the whole thing is about such jokes).

Originally Posted by Heart (Post 166378)

Replacing 20-something "frat boys" with 40-something "lesbian cougars," and thinking it's satire is really pretty pathetic. I would expect more from Second City.

It's not even the fact that the dykes are made up to look ugly is that stereotypical lesbian manner or that they use a word like "twat," it's that whomever made this so clearly knows nothing about lesbian culture. That's why its not funny.

For christ fucking sake, a lesbian cougar would not go after a drunk straight college girl. A lesbian cougar would go after a hot young packing butch go-go dancer.

;)

ETA: As for the predator thing -- I get why that's disturbing, but I don't think anyone in the clip is supposed to be underage. Young does not equate to child or minor. Let's remember that people with large age differences DO engage in consensual relationships. Part of the problem with the whole "cougar" thing is that it is so totally age-ist - on both ends of the spectrum.

Originally Posted by BullDog (Post 166385)

In order to make good satire you need to know your subject material. These people know nothing about lesbians- it's obvious.

Originally Posted by EnderD_503 (Post 166403)

Except you seem to be missing the point of the satire. The satire itself is not against lesbians, and, therefore, does not need to pretend to show an accurate portrayal of lesbians. The satire, in this case, would be a method of mocking the popular portrayal of lesbians, which is something it does very well. Many here who disagree with me have even made the point that this reflects what seems to be a culture of misrepresenting lesbians for whatever purpose...which would be the whole point of the satire.

The satire does not attempt to show the accurate portrayal of lesbians, because lesbians (and therefore the criticism of lesbians) are not its target. Those who portray lesbians in such a fashion are the target of the satire, and so their misinformed portrayal of lesbians takes the forefront. This, if it were meant as a satire, is classic satiric method. I bold this, because, to me, is the point, and I really don't see how accurate portrayal of lesbians would actually help this be a good satiric work.

Originally Posted by BullDog (Post 166404)

Ender I'm a lesbian. Are you? I find it quite irritating that you think you can tell me I'm missing the point.

Lesbian stereotypes are damaging. We've spent months trying to discuss that here. This is irritating.

Originally Posted by EnderD_503 (Post 166417)

This is equally irritating for me, because in many respects what you are saying is the entire point of my post.

The satire attempts to highlight the misrepresentations of lesbians in popular contemporary culture. If, again, it was meant as a satire, then it is trying to highlight the fact that those stereotypes still exist and is actually ridiculing their existence.

For example, in Borat, Borat (Cohen, the actor/director, himself is Jewish) says some very anti-semitic things. People claim that it propagates anti-semitism, but that is not the point of the satire. The point is to highlight the continued existance of anti-semitism and, furthermore, to highlight society's hypocrisy; not only because anti-semitism continues to exist, but because so many who laugh at Borat's jokes have likely made anti-semitic comments themselves. It mocks the continued hypocrisy of the populace who continues to perpetuate these misrepresentations and stereotypes.

Originally Posted by BullDog (Post 166422)

I'm done. I don't need you to educate me on satire- particularly when it comes to lesbians.

The video isn't funny to me. The end.

Originally Posted by Organicbutch (Post 166436)

Most satires will always be offensive to someone. I find that when people get the most offended is when they feel like what is being said is true about them or it's something that they don't want to deal with. It was a lame attempt at satire. I don't think that they were saying that lesbians or gay people as a whole are predators. Most of the lesbians that I know would never try to pick up a drunk college girl. Some of them would. Everything is on a person by person basis including what some people find funny and what others find offensive. I've seen things that were far worse than this video, like that dumb girl on The View saying that older women becomes lesbians because they "Couldn't get a man." That is a hell of a lot more dangerous than this stupid video. That's all in my own opinion of course.

:poc-biggrin:

Originally Posted by The_Lady_Snow (Post 166439)

I would like to address the above in red.

Help me understand please. I find it offensive and downright ugly to show young drunk girls being taken advantage of. It's not because I have some past issue or because I don't want to look in the mirror, it's because it DOES happen and young women are raped and hurt cause someone thought it funny to spike their drink or get them all drunk so they can get in their pants.

Cause frankly I am trying here I see no humor in that, lesbians or not

Originally Posted by The_Lady_Snow (Post 166439)

I would like to address the above in red.

Help me understand please. I find it offensive and downright ugly to show young drunk girls being taken advantage of. It's not because I have some past issue or because I don't want to look in the mirror, it's because it DOES happen and young women are raped and hurt cause someone thought it funny to spike their drink or get them all drunk so they can get in their pants.

Cause frankly I am trying here I see no humor in that, lesbians or not