Tuesday, May 23, 2023

Who Knows Better?

 According to Joy Behar, notable for being an unattractive, old, white, liberal, woman, Tim Scott and Clarence Thomas have absolutely zero idea of what it’s like to be a black man.   

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

For what it's worth, I never at one time in my adult life thought of Behar, or really any woman as being notable for being an unattractive, old anything. But then, I'm not a gradeschool pig.

No wonder so many women think of men, and especially conservative men, as sexist pigs.

Dan

Craig said...

What an excellent example of trying to change the subject. But, I'll play along for a minute. Unattractive is a subjective term, and what people fins attractive varies from person to person. Behar is 80, which is older than the average life expectancy for women in the US. So, it's not inaccurate to call her old.

I guess the actual point, that she is telling black men that they don't know what it's like to be black, is something that you'll simply ignore. It's easier to make shit up as a target for your faux outrage, than to deal with something idiotic said by someone on your side.

FYI, I didn't even mention the rest of the co hosts nodding in agreement with her idiocy.

Dan Trabue said...

When you seek to dismiss women for their looks, for their age, you ARE part of our oppressive patriarchal history, a part that belongs in the ashbins of history. How are you so unaware of how misogynistic and hateful and oppressive these types of words are? You ARE a Trump conservative, because this is exactly the way he treats women.

I don't watch TV and know nothing much about Behar, but I'm certain that she's NOT "notable" for being unattractive and old... except to oppressive patriarchal pigs like Trump and apparently, you.

Destroy the patriarchy. Get on the right side of decency and justice and history.

Craig said...

Excellent!!! You've chosen to double down on your idiocy, on top of continuing to ignore her idiocy.

I'm not dismissing her for her looks or age. I'm pointing out one more egregious instance of her using her position as a TV host to push a completely idiotic narrative. The fact that all you have is false accusations of misogyny, and of me being a "Trump conservative". Neither of those are true, and neither of those are accusations you can prove. Just two more unproven false accusations, instead of dealing with the point of the post.

I do appreciate how proud you are of your ignorance, so assured that you must be absolutely right, even though you admit that you are ignorant.

Speaking of the "right side of history", something of which I doubt you actually know anything. You are literally ignoring/defending an old, white, liberal, woman who's telling black men that she knows better than they do what it means to be a black man. So you continue to ignore/defend this racist idiocy, while you prate on about a bunch of bullshit.

Craig said...

Behar is "notable" for making these sorts of idiotic, hyper partisan, comments. The rest of my description is extra.

Anonymous said...

"I'm not dismissing her for her looks or age. I'm pointing out one more egregious instance of her using her position as a TV host to push a completely idiotic narrative."

Then SAY, "noted for being a white liberal woman." It's quite easy. Her looks and age - whether or not they meet your approval - are irrelevant to your attempted point. Your misogyny only takes away from any point you're trying to make.

Dan

Craig said...

This commitment to making this one big ad hom attack on me, while ignoring the racist idiocy of Behar is incredibly impressive. I remember when you decried ad hom attacks, now you seemingly have nothing else.

It's not a question of my approval or not. She's objectively old, by virtually any definition, especially as she's exceeded the average life expectancy for a woman in the US. That she is unattractive (which encompasses much more than her looks) is simply my opinion.

But, hey, as long as you can beat this dead horse and keep up the bullshit false accusations why stop? Why address that racist idiocy from someone on your side, when you can make up false bullshit about me?

Marshal Art said...

It's amazing as well Dan's "outrage" given how important it is for women themselves to do all they can to look as attractive as possible. Thus, it is not at all "misogynistic" to comment on which succeed in their endeavors and which don't. If one spoke of one of two or three women in a crowd and was asked to identify which of the two or three was being referenced, it would be an easy way to do so to say "the hot one", if that woman was notably more attractive than the other one or two. And if they were all of the same relative build, with the same hair color and other forms of appearance, the only mitigating factor would be what counts as being "hot" to the person seeking specifics.

Dan's intention is to disparage, and in doing so, he'll exploit typical behaviors common to 99% of a given demographic and use it them to paint conservatives in a bad light. Far easier, as noted here, than addressing far more important issues which, if left unaddressed, indict Dan and his ilk for the lying hypocrites they are.

As to Behar's idiocy, Trey Gowdy was in the Tucker Carlson spot last night and opened with this issue. He noted that while asshats like Behar and Trabue attack good people like Clarence Thomas and Tim Scott as "tokens", they do not do the same for blacks of the left, like Ketangi-Brown or Warnock. Yet, the Dem Party is the party of identity politics and use the presence of minorities among them to promote themselves as "inclusive"...which is the very thing they regard as "tokenism" when the GOP selects from among minorities.

Again, lying hypocrites.

Anonymous said...

"keep up the bullshit false accusations..."

WHY do you all do that, the false claims about ME making false accusations? Anyone can look and see I've made NO false claims.

What I said...

"When you seek to dismiss women for their looks, for their age, you ARE part of our oppressive patriarchal history,"

You were literally belittling her for several attributes, LEADING with a stupid claim about her looks. A claim that YOU even dismiss as "The rest of my description is extra." That is, not pertinent to the actual point you were trying to make. An irrelevant attack on her looks, which is what pigmen have historically done in trying to minimize and belittle women.

Why?

You were caught in a clearly sexist, misogynistic attack that you admit was irrelevant to your point. But instead of recognizing it and apologizing for it, you've just doubled down on it.

Is it the case that you are ignorant of how such oppressive language hurts women? If so, how? This was an argument the sexists lost over 40 years ago.

Dan

Craig said...

"Why?"

Well, he problem with this question is that it assumes that all the bullshit you made up in the preceding paragraph is actually True and accurate. But since I didn't do what you claim I did, I have no way to answer why I did not do something.

Again, there was no "oppressive" language used, therefore no women were "hurt".

Still obsessed with this made up, bullshit, ad hom attack on me, while ignoring that ignorant racist crap that Behar spewed.

I point out your false, bullshit, ad hom attacks when they happen. The problem is that you can't prove any of your bullshit, but you have nothing else to do since acknowledging the idiotic racism would be problematic for you.

I know, at some point you'll make some vague, bland, general statement about how you don't like it when anyone says anything, blah, blah, blah, and act like that means you actually condemned this specific idiotic racist bullshit.

Anonymous said...

"there was no "oppressive" language used, therefore no women were "hurt"."

So, your answer to my earlier question is clearly, "Yes, I'm ignorant of the harm my words do to women, girls, children and men."

Look at the research or, he'll, just LISTEN to women. They'll tell you.

You've been alerted. Choosing to remain in ignorance and continue contributing to this kind of harm is now a choice you're making.

Dan

Anonymous said...

Read about your sexist misogyny and the harm YOU are contributing to.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8345530/

Really, how did you get to be a middle aged human in the 21st century and NOT know this?

Your ignorance is causing harm.

Dan

Craig said...

No, the bullshit you made up and claim is my answer is NOT my answer.

Racist, blah, blah, blah, Misogynist, blah, blah, blah. Same old shit.

Marshal Art said...

Don't forget, Craig...words are weapons to the left. That is, if they're words THEY don't like. I again insist the women I've known all my life...those with whom I've associated...are made of sturdier stock and can give and take crap equally if need be. We all can be "hurt" by words. But only the weak and spineless are so devastated they'll pretend it's like physical harm. Such people wallow in the victim mentality because they're lacking in what it takes to live according to "sticks and stones".

Marshal Art said...

Dan's link in his comment on May 24, 2023 at 8:40 PM does not seem to be relevant to his whining about dudes talking amongst themselves about hot babes. What that link describes is how girls enslave themselves to cultural concepts of beauty. That isn't the fault of the culture, especially when girls who are natural examples of the cultural concept easily benefit. In the meantime, the "lesser" girls strive for it because the whole deal between male and female is how each side attracts the other. Harm comes to members of each side when those members put too much stock in what others think, rather than just living good lives the best they can.

So Dan fails in an epic manner with this lame attempt to support his position. Men diggin' chicks is not in and of itself harmful to anyone, unless men aren't discreet in their locker-room talk. An example is that I've not heard of any women who have suffered any traumatic reaction upon hearing or seeing the Billy Bush tape. However, I wouldn't be surprised if the women of Jeff St are still in counseling as a result.

Anonymous said...

So... you're AWARE of the harm words like yours cause and you don't care?

Given the reality, the data about how words like yours causes harm, either you're aware and don't care or you're ignorant of the data. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt... that you're just ignorant, but you tell me. And Don't bother saying, No, the experts and data are wrong unless you provide data to disprove it.

Dan

Craig said...

"So... you're AWARE of the harm words like yours cause and you don't care?"

1. You're still ignoring the idiotic racist drivel that Beher spewed.
2. You making vague and unsubstantiated claims about harm literally means absolutely nothing.
3. You can't show any instance of my specific words doing specific, measurable harm to anyone.

Given the reality, the data about how words like yours causes harm, either you're aware and "don't care or you're ignorant of the data. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt... that you're just ignorant, but you tell me. And Don't bother saying, No, the experts and data are wrong unless you provide data to disprove it."

More foolishness intended to focus on my imagined sins, while ignoring what Behar said.

I suspect one possible explanation is that Dan agrees with Behar that she and he know more about being black than actual black men.

Marshal Art said...

The only possibly legit "harm" words can cause are hurt feelings, which isn't harm caused as much as irrational response.

Craig said...

Dan and his ilk desperately want to conflate hurt feelings, with actual harm. They want to be able to draw a straight line between someone who does anything except 100% agree with whatever the cause du jour is, to suicide or some other actual harm.

"If you don't unhesitatingly and completely support "gender affirming care" for children, then they will kill themselves.".

It doesn't matter if that statement is factually True, it's their truth and they're sticking to it.