Author Topic: Getting hit hard by off-hand expression of contempt  (Read 6909 times)

Offline Mikaela

  • BetterMost 1000+ Posts Club
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,229
  • Unsaid... and now unsayable
Getting hit hard by off-hand expression of contempt
« on: May 14, 2007, 06:26:18 pm »
I looked around everywhere for some thread where I could put this, since I have this big huge fear of starting threads  ::) and have never done so before.... But I couldn't find an appropriate place so I'm posting this here to get it off my chest because it really did make a strong impression on me. It relates to an offhand remark in a TV program about a very serious topic in itself, an offhand remark that made me sad. And made me think of BBM and especially of Ennis.

I was watching a BBC docu-drama on TV yesterday; "Nürnberg, nazis on trial" from 2006. It's a mix of documentary recent-day interviews with people who were present at the trials, various original footage from 1945, and actors re-creating the trial as it goes ahead.  It was interesting, intense, well-made and thoughtprovoking. But.....

In the course of the episode (which focused on Albert Speer), there was also a fair bit of information about Fritz Sauckel, who had the chief responsibility for getting forced labour to Germany from the occupied territories, in order to manufacture weapons for Speer's war machine in Germany in WWII. Sauckel was depicted as a complete and utter cringing coward in the documentary. Nervous and frightened, shivering, moaning and groaning, taking no responsibility for his actions, blaming everyone else.

In the course of the program a US military man of the old school (I didn't catch his rank or exactly what he was doing at the trial) gave the following as his recent-day RL interview opinion of Sauckel (and I'm paraphrasing, but it's close enough to what was actually said): "S. wasn't a man, he was nothing but a big sissy. I wouldn't go as far as indicating that he was a homosexual, but he was a weakling, a coward, he could never have stood up for himself in a fight."

So..... here is this high-rank nazi, a contemptible war criminal, resonsible for the deaths or misery of literally millions of people, a man who was condemned to death for his deeds, evidently a coward, weak and nervous, eager to please the big shots no matter what he was told to do, unable to stand up for himself - but the speaker still wouldn't go as far as calling him gay?!?!? Even S hadn't sunk quite as low as to merit *that* level of contempt, had he?

(Incidentally, we later learned that S. had 12 kids, so it certainly wasn't his private life that contributed to our military man's bigoted statement).

I was shocked that BBC kept that statement from one of "the good guys" in the program. It speaks volumes and more about attitudes towards gay men that one would wish were long in the past by now. It had everything to do with expression of horrible prejudices and nothing to do in relation to describing Sauckel and his actions. Keeping that statement in the program indicated that the program-maker didn't even realize this; - as late as 2006!  >:(

Also, I think this illustrated perfectly not only what prejudices have been alive and may still be thriving in the military for the last 60 years and more..... but also very, very strongly reminded me what Ennis had to struggle with in his life. Not only the fear of being found out and outright killed, but the stereotypes he'd learned to completely accept, and the opinions he'd been brought up with and had internalized - and believed. That "queers" were worthy of nothing but contempt and ridicule, that they were pitiful cowards. That about anything wrong or bad you could otherwise do in your life would still be better than admitting to being "queer".   

moremojo

  • Guest
Re: Getting hit hard by off-hand expression of contempt
« Reply #1 on: May 14, 2007, 06:37:06 pm »
Thanks for sharing this, Mikaela, and congratulations on opening your first thread!

This one reference in your post says so much: military man of the old school. The old school did think this way, and many that are still around still do. Things have changed tremendously since this one man's youth, and will doubtlessly continue to change for the better, in regard to lesbigay issues, as, frankly, the old bigots grow old and die and the more enlightened youth assume positions of power and authority. I believe the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy will be thrown into the dustbin of history relatively soon.

At the same time, this does reflect the very real (and very legitimate) fears of Ennis, and sheds light on the struggles that he went through. Gay people historically have been unusual among repressed minorities in that they not only learn that the dominant culture hates and fears them, but that they learn to hate and fear themselves. It's a double whammy, and much needless suffering has resulted from what so many of us now recognize as the sickness of homophobia.

Offline delalluvia

  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *******
  • Posts: 8,289
  • "Truth is an iron bride"
Re: Getting hit hard by off-hand expression of contempt
« Reply #2 on: May 14, 2007, 08:12:21 pm »
Sadly, here in the US, macho men still reign supreme as the 'correct' expression of manliness.  I believe it was an Army general who was recently quoted and then criticized for his - personal - opinion that homosexuality was immoral.

If a man does not meet the criteria of quiet, stiff upper lip, skirt chasing machismo, then his sexuality is suspect.

This attitude is still extremely prevelant and especially so in the military.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2007, 09:12:43 pm by delalluvia »

Offline HerrKaiser

  • BetterMost 1000+ Posts Club
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,708
Re: Getting hit hard by off-hand expression of contempt
« Reply #3 on: May 15, 2007, 10:53:23 am »
Sadly, here in the US, macho men still reign supreme as the 'correct' expression of manliness.  I believe it was an Army general who was recently quoted and then criticized for his - personal - opinion that homosexuality was immoral.

If a man does not meet the criterial of quiet, stiff upper lip, skirt chasing machismo, then his sexuality is suspect.

This attitude is still extremely prevelant and especially so in the military.


I don't agree with this stereotype. Over 30% of single parent households are headed by a man. the statistics show that most men share child rearing duties with their wives including shopping and inside home care. Like the 3-martini lunch, the stereotype that if men aren't 'quiet, stiff upper lipped, skirt chasers' they are 'suspect' is an out dated concept based on most factors and studies I see in the media and living situation. Trying to apply a 1945 wartime trial comment to currrent day society is risky, I think, in terms of true parallels is risky, imo.

Offline ednbarby

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • BetterMost 1000+ Posts Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,586
Re: Getting hit hard by off-hand expression of contempt
« Reply #4 on: May 15, 2007, 11:28:03 am »
Kind of along these lines, I see the "Know Your State Motto" email is circling again, apparently because it's been updated.  Namely, the entry for Wyoming has been changed by some wizard somewhere to be "Wyoming: Where the men are men and the sheep are scared."  And in case that doesn't spell it out clearly enough, for the profoundly stupid people, they've added "(Home of Brokeback Mountain)".

Can't tell you how pissed off I was when I saw that.  Still am.

News Flash:  Homosexuality does not equal Beastiality.  Details at 11:00.

Fucking morons.

Totally agree with you, too, Mikaela.  That comment would have (and does) bother me, too.  I don't care that it's coming from an "old school" guy.  It's just yet another really sad commentary about how attitudes towards homosexuality are still so screwed up.
No more beans!

Offline Mikaela

  • BetterMost 1000+ Posts Club
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,229
  • Unsaid... and now unsayable
Re: Getting hit hard by off-hand expression of contempt
« Reply #5 on: May 15, 2007, 12:04:49 pm »

Trying to apply a 1945 wartime trial comment to currrent day society is risky, I think, in terms of true parallels.

But the comment wasn't made in 1945, it was made recently. (The program didn't state when all these (by now obviously old) men were interviewed, but certainly gave the impression it happened in connection with making the docu-drama which is dated 2006.) So it was quite apparent the man interviewed had not changed his views over those long years since -45, and felt quite at ease about speaking this way, still.

However what made an equal impression on me was the fact that the program makers let this characteristic be included in the program. I'm sure they could have found other means and other people to describe the nazi in question, or they could at least have edited the statement made. To blithely allow that kind of contempt for gays to shine so clearly through (and thereby tacitly give the appearance of acceptance or indifference concerning this kind of sentiment) was thoroughly disappointing to me. Especially as it was made in relation to the Nürnberg trials when BBC might - and should - have given some though to the fact that gays were among those who suffered and died in the camps.


(As for relating the sentiments to Ennis, that's just my kind of stream-of-consciousness type of viewing a TV program. I still keep relating all sorts of everything back to Brokeback.)

Offline HerrKaiser

  • BetterMost 1000+ Posts Club
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,708
Re: Getting hit hard by off-hand expression of contempt
« Reply #6 on: May 15, 2007, 12:31:39 pm »
Ah, I see your point, but if you think the producers/editors should have not included the interview, then none of this thread would exist. The man's comment is being positioned here as an indication of a commonly held point of view. If his comments was not known, then would people think there is less of this thinking in the world?

To me this is an issue of 'does a falling tree in the forest make noise if no one is present'. If the sequence was cut, there'd be no issue; I think it may be better to put forth information as unpleasant as anyone may take it in order to know what is going on. I personally find the comment disagreeable, but in the context of things, it falls way down my list of concerns. but, if it was cut from the final edit, no one would know how some people use 'weakling and sissy' as something related to homosexuality (he must not know about Alexander the Great).

but in reality, he must be pushing 90 years old by now, and people of his age are going to make comments, say things, etc, that are from their pasts that do not necessarily reflect their core beliefs or how the mainstream population thinks. Many people of that age group will call women, girls or honey and have less contempt about women than a boss who calls a woman Ms. Smith. They may use many non PC words/phrases just because of their age and I don't think there will be a resulting net negative impact from such.
« Last Edit: May 15, 2007, 12:42:15 pm by HerrKaiser »

Offline delalluvia

  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *******
  • Posts: 8,289
  • "Truth is an iron bride"
Re: Getting hit hard by off-hand expression of contempt
« Reply #7 on: May 15, 2007, 09:02:44 pm »

I don't agree with this stereotype. Over 30% of single parent households are headed by a man. the statistics show that most men share child rearing duties with their wives including shopping and inside home care. Like the 3-martini lunch, the stereotype that if men aren't 'quiet, stiff upper lipped, skirt chasers' they are 'suspect' is an out dated concept based on most factors and studies I see in the media and living situation. Trying to apply a 1945 wartime trial comment to currrent day society is risky, I think, in terms of true parallels is risky, imo.

I would like to believe the attitude is changing, but I live in Texas, mein Herr.  The stereotype is large and in charge down here and no sign of it going away.  A man friend of mine recently told me that as a woman, what exactly my rights are to my own body is something that needs to be discussed and decided upon (by men).  A younger man I met on a Lord of the Rings film board scoffed when at the end of ROTK, the Aragorn character breaks into song.

He was contemptuous.  As if a warrior king would suddenly sing!  That was obviously an unmanly action.  And these opinions are coming from the current generation as well as the younger generation.

And yes, I've heard anti-gay slams from the teenaged crowd my cousin runs with.

It's sad.

Offline HerrKaiser

  • BetterMost 1000+ Posts Club
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,708
Re: Getting hit hard by off-hand expression of contempt
« Reply #8 on: May 16, 2007, 10:32:36 am »
I understand that your personal experiences include some situations that are unforntunate. But, one's few examples of a behavior do not indicate a pattern or ought be expanded to the entire nation or population. The idea that "..one man on the lord of the rings..." and "a man friend of mine..." would be in any way exemplory of most men is the essence of unfair stereotyping, imo.


Offline delalluvia

  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *******
  • Posts: 8,289
  • "Truth is an iron bride"
Re: Getting hit hard by off-hand expression of contempt
« Reply #9 on: May 16, 2007, 11:04:50 pm »
I understand that your personal experiences include some situations that are unforntunate. But, one's few examples of a behavior do not indicate a pattern or ought be expanded to the entire nation or population. The idea that "..one man on the lord of the rings..." and "a man friend of mine..." would be in any way exemplory of most men is the essence of unfair stereotyping, imo.



True, my evidence is ancedotal.  But then what would you use to prove that things are changing? 

injest

  • Guest
Re: Getting hit hard by off-hand expression of contempt
« Reply #10 on: May 16, 2007, 11:11:17 pm »
I would add to that, Del, that doesn't your environment define your ideas? You can think the stereotype is outdated but if the men you deal with in your own life still adhere to it, doesn't that make it a reality to you?


Offline delalluvia

  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *******
  • Posts: 8,289
  • "Truth is an iron bride"
Re: Getting hit hard by off-hand expression of contempt
« Reply #11 on: May 17, 2007, 12:09:50 am »
I would add to that, Del, that doesn't your environment define your ideas? You can think the stereotype is outdated but if the men you deal with in your own life still adhere to it, doesn't that make it a reality to you?



Absolutely. 

Remember, I live in a state that didn't approve of gay marriage.  A state that has had a conservative Republican governor for 3 terms now, the state from which 2 Bush men came to be president, a state that invariably in the voting goes Republican.

There are liberal men around who believe gay marriage is true equality and that women's ability to choose is her right - I know many of them as well, those are the men I date - but I also have friends who are not of the same mindset.

A conservative friend just threw an out-of-his-ass statistic at me - "70% of Americans don't want gay marriage."  I laughed in his face.  "70% eh?  There are nearly 400 million Americans.  Did they poll ALL of them?  If so, I myself living in a major metropolitan area, being a tax-paying adult SHOULD have been asked my opinion, but no one asked me..."

He believes stats like that.  I am surrounded by Texas men.  I used to unload semi trucks as part of my job.  Only 1 of the many truckers (all men) I dealt with thought that if I wanted a job like that, I could unload it by myself.  The others were what I called good ole boy gentlemen who wouldn't think of letting a little lady like me unload a semi-truck full of merchandise.  They helped me out every single time.

Your reality is what you experience daily.

Offline HerrKaiser

  • BetterMost 1000+ Posts Club
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,708
Re: Getting hit hard by off-hand expression of contempt
« Reply #12 on: May 17, 2007, 10:44:19 am »
Absolutely. 

Remember, I live in a state that didn't approve of gay marriage.  A state that has had a conservative Republican governor for 3 terms now, the state from which 2 Bush men came to be president, a state that invariably in the voting goes Republican.

There are liberal men around who believe gay marriage is true equality and that women's ability to choose is her right - I know many of them as well, those are the men I date - but I also have friends who are not of the same mindset.

A conservative friend just threw an out-of-his-ass statistic at me - "70% of Americans don't want gay marriage."  I laughed in his face.  "70% eh?  There are nearly 400 million Americans.  Did they poll ALL of them?  If so, I myself living in a major metropolitan area, being a tax-paying adult SHOULD have been asked my opinion, but no one asked me..."

He believes stats like that.  I am surrounded by Texas men.  I used to unload semi trucks as part of my job.  Only 1 of the many truckers (all men) I dealt with thought that if I wanted a job like that, I could unload it by myself.  The others were what I called good ole boy gentlemen who wouldn't think of letting a little lady like me unload a semi-truck full of merchandise.  They helped me out every single time.

Your reality is what you experience daily.
[/quote


Yes, one's reality is one's reality. But it seems your point is validating the use of stereotypes. The reason we have to go beyond our own personal experiences and see the bigger picture is to avoid labeling all blacks as street gang thugs (even though some people's only personal experiences--I know some--with blacks are as crime victims) or all gays as sex crazed irresponsible queens, if one's only personal experience with gay people was the gay day parade in san francisco. Or, as the point here, stereotyping men as non evolved chauvinists when the projectalbe data shows otherwise.

Offline serious crayons

  • BetterMost Moderator
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 22,712
Re: Getting hit hard by off-hand expression of contempt
« Reply #13 on: May 17, 2007, 01:20:01 pm »
I have been reading this thread for a few days and wanting to jump in because the topic is interesting, but I can never figure out what to say. I guess because I don't understand the argument. As far as I can tell, everybody is right.

Are all men macho sexists? Obviously not. Are all men progressive feminists? Obviously not. What is the proportion of each?

We could draw upon our personal experiences. Del lives in a conservative environment. I have always lived, worked and socialized in liberal environments. My opinions would be colored by my circumstances, just as Del's are.

Or we could look at random bits of evidence: Americans elected George W. Bush president, late-night talk-show hosts make jokes about BBM, commercials usually depict women as being responsible for domestic chores. But there are counterarguments: lots of people voted for Kerry and Gore, BBM made much more money and earned more criticial praise than expected, more men are helping with housework. BUT THEN, there are still further counterarguments: BBM didn't win the BP Oscar, women make 73 cents for every dollar men earn and perform more unpaid domestic work, etc. etc.

How about a survey? Unlike Del, I do tend to give credence to research that draw conclusions about all Americans' opinions based on a representative sample. But if we conducted a survey, what would we find out? That some proportion of people are still homophobic and sexist and racist, and that some proportion of people aren't, or at least aren't as much as they were 20 or 40 or 60 years ago.

So what? We've come quite a ways, but we're not there yet.

Offline loneleeb3

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • Posting Vacation
  • BetterMost 1000+ Posts Club
  • *
  • Posts: 4,970
  • I swear.............
Re: Getting hit hard by off-hand expression of contempt
« Reply #14 on: May 17, 2007, 01:46:44 pm »
Quote
they not only learn that the dominant culture hates and fears them, but that they learn to hate and fear themselves. It's a double whammy, and much needless suffering has resulted from what so many of us now recognize as the sickness of homophobia.
Thankew!
Friend, you're singin my song here. Sure explains why I am the way I am.  >:(
"The biggest obstacle to most of us achieving our dreams isn't reality, it's our own fear"

"Saint Paul had his Epiphany on the road to Damascus, Mine was on Brokeback Mountain"

Offline Mikaela

  • BetterMost 1000+ Posts Club
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,229
  • Unsaid... and now unsayable
Re: Getting hit hard by off-hand expression of contempt
« Reply #15 on: May 17, 2007, 05:30:08 pm »
Hmmmm........going back to the first post here and the quote that upset me so for a moment, the reason why it upset me so much, I think, was its completely "offhand" nature. The ease with which it was spoken, - the speaker obviously feeling certain that everyone in their right mind would get his point and share his views. He wasn't trying to be controversial, he wasn't aware of being controversial; - he was just trying to give an clear and honest description. Quite evidently he was voicing something he must have been thinking back in 1945, and he hadn't changed his mindset one bit since then.

It was a cold blast from the past, and no mistake. A past that was less than 10 years before BBM lets the murder of Earl occur. As such it sure sent chills down my spine.

I don't put that much weight on this one man not having changed his views over the long years - but having thought it over I disagree with this:
Quote
  If the sequence was cut, there'd be no issue; I think it may be better to put forth information as unpleasant as anyone may take it in order to know what is going on. I personally find the comment disagreeable, but in the context of things, it falls way down my list of concerns. but, if it was cut from the final edit, no one would know how some people use 'weakling and sissy' as something related to homosexuality ..

I think the sequence should have been cut. The program was not at all about people's views on homosexuality (nor did it see to it that a counter-opinion was voiced.) It let someone show contempt for a truly contemptible person by means of embracing and broadcasting prejudice against a whole group of people, seeming to assume this prejudice would be commonly shared and understood by the viewers. That was an error of judgement on BBC's part.

That present-day error also served to make the whole thing hit me hard. Because I don't think you see very often, if at all, opinions like that without the speaker to some extent being aware that he is controversial. And provocative. That's what almost anyone'd be especially aiming for, saying something like that today. Certainly all these talk show hosts are very aware of the controvercy - that's what they're building on, that's why they keeop harping on the same stale jokes. And people such as conservative Christian anti-gay preachers may completely believe their own prejudiced statements with a fervour for all I know, but they also know that there are many that oppose them. That's why they bother to spend so much time and loud voice on the issue. And so forth. In general, I think that most anti-gay sentiments in RL, including some instances mentioned in this thread, originate with people who were and are entirely aware that their attitude isn't a commonly held view. They build bellingerence on knowing that their views are being contested, may be becoming rare, and that there's controvercy and disagreement about.

So, in my long and meandering way getting to the point at last.  ::) This is what I am not used to encountering in this day and age: People with prejudices against homosexuality who are completely oblivious to the fact that theirs is by no means a commonly shared and "the only possible" view. In that sense, I think the world has moved ahead quite a bit. And so.... yes, any completely offhand expression of contempt in a contemporary TV program hits all the harder. But from the discussion in this thread I get the impression that such offhand remarks and oblivious attitudes may still be more common than I thought....  I'd like to hear some more opinions on that, if possible.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2007, 05:47:10 pm by Mikaela »

Offline serious crayons

  • BetterMost Moderator
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 22,712
Re: Getting hit hard by off-hand expression of contempt
« Reply #16 on: May 17, 2007, 07:23:11 pm »
But from the discussion in this thread I get the impression that such offhand remarks and oblivious attitudes may still be more common than I thought....  I'd like to hear some more opinions on that, if possible.

I think we're to the point that most people realize that openly homophobic remarks are socially unacceptable. Many straight people undoubtedly still harbor homophobic views, and no doubt say homophobic things among friends or when they know their audience won't mind. But most are careful enough not to say anything blatantly homophobic in public (though they haven't gotten past saying things that are mildly or jokingly homophobic -- all the BBM jokes are one huge example). That's why there was such hubbub over Ann Coulter's calling John Edwards the f-word, or that guy on Grey's anatomy calling his costar that same slur.

I think the cultural awareness of homophobia, in this country anyway, is about 10 to 20 years behind awareness of racism. There are STILL people who make racist remarks in private, of course. But almost everybody has learned that saying anything openly racist is a big taboo, and when speaking publicly or in unfamiliar groups they know they have to be very careful. I think people are just now understanding they have to be careful about making homophobic remarks, as well. And, as with racism, there are a few unenlightened stragglers like the guy you saw, Mikaela, who just don't get it yet.

Does that make sense?

One possibly good thing is, I think attitudes may follow speech. That is, first people realize that the remarks are no-nos. They are still wildly racist/homophobic/sexist, but they know better than to say so out loud to people they don't know well. Eventually, it sinks in that the remarks are no-nos because not just the words but the attitudes themselves are widely considered unacceptable. And once they understand that, and start to be conscious of the fact that their prejudices are Neanderthal, their attitudes can start to change.

Offline Brown Eyes

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • BetterMost Moderator
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,377
Re: Getting hit hard by off-hand expression of contempt
« Reply #17 on: May 20, 2007, 06:20:51 pm »
Hi Mikaela,

I just discovered this very thought provoking thread!  Thanks for starting it.  :)  Well, the statement you describe is certainly very disheartening.  And, I agree with you that the off handed nature of it and the fact that the BBC left it in is very upsetting.

And, I agree with Katherine about the use of language when it comes to racism, sexism and homophobia.

I think the cultural awareness of homophobia, in this country anyway, is about 10 to 20 years behind awareness of racism. There are STILL people who make racist remarks in private, of course. But almost everybody has learned that saying anything openly racist is a big taboo, and when speaking publicly or in unfamiliar groups they know they have to be very careful. I think people are just now understanding they have to be careful about making homophobic remarks, as well. And, as with racism, there are a few unenlightened stragglers like the guy you saw, Mikaela, who just don't get it yet.

Does that make sense?

One possibly good thing is, I think attitudes may follow speech. That is, first people realize that the remarks are no-nos. They are still wildly racist/homophobic/sexist, but they know better than to say so out loud to people they don't know well. Eventually, it sinks in that the remarks are no-nos because not just the words but the attitudes themselves are widely considered unacceptable. And once they understand that, and start to be conscious of the fact that their prejudices are Neanderthal, their attitudes can start to change.

I know a lot and I mean *a lot* of people who still very freely say things like "that's so gay"  meaning something like "that's so stupid or silly."  I think there are large segments of the population that still feel pretty comfortable making homophobic remarks... and maybe some (perhaps like the guy Mikaela saw in the documentary) who hardly even are aware of what they're saying. My sense and hope, though, is that this is all changing.  I hope that baby-step by baby-step people are becoming much more sensitive to the words that come out of their mouths.  Everything from the Michael Richards racist rant to the Don Imus sexism... and yes Coulter's homophobic language that all got quite a lot of analysis in mainstream media (and all were widely condemned by many/ most) might have the cumulative impact of raising a level of awareness when it comes to language.
the world was asleep to our latent fuss - bowie

Offline ednbarby

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • BetterMost 1000+ Posts Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,586
Re: Getting hit hard by off-hand expression of contempt
« Reply #18 on: May 20, 2007, 08:13:40 pm »
I agree, Amanda.  And I'm, God help me, actually grateful to Ann Coulter for making such a horse's ass (she has a horse's face - might as well have an ass to match, after all) of herself with that whole "John Edwards is a fag" bit.  Her cronies actually took a breath and went "Ew."  Now many of them are distancing themselves from her like crazy.  So, thank you, Ann.  You did more for our cause by just being your usual obnoxious, loathesome self than a year of talks by Annie P. and Judy Shepard could have ever accomplished.  Those guys are just preachin' to the choir, after all (though power to 'em - they do make a difference).  But you - you do it just by showing how hateful your "thoughts" really are.
No more beans!

Offline Mikaela

  • BetterMost 1000+ Posts Club
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,229
  • Unsaid... and now unsayable
Re: Getting hit hard by off-hand expression of contempt
« Reply #19 on: May 21, 2007, 11:14:44 am »
I googled "Coulter and Edwards" to find out what was going on ( I haven't seen this mentioned in any news stories over here,  neither on TV nor printed, - so I didn't know about this.) Useful as background info, in a horribly weird way, and sadly completely appropriate to the topic of this thread.  In case there are other Europeans similarly in the dark, here's a site that has the background story in brief plus a clip of the statement. Seems the lady is actually trying to make a joke to please her in-crowd? How totally sad and embarrassing. I don't know, even in the US I really wouldn't have expected to hear something like that pass for public political commentary outside the ranks of the KKK. The worst thing is that the (obviously somewhat shocked) crowd actually cheers.  :-\