LA news show slut shames weather forecaster on air

boing
205

Okay, please understand… I’m not defending what happened. I was trying to have a rational discussion about other possible ways of looking at the situation–conjecture, mostly. Considering it from other angles. It was a mistake to try and do that here, and I recognize that now.

I agree that a public apology needs to be made. I agree that it’s ridiculous that that meteorologist was treated as if the sight of her body was shameful. and that it can (and will) be used as an example of the larger cultural issue at hand regardless of her statement. And that’s the last I’ll say about it. On to safer threads…

206

I thought I was reasonably responding to what you said and specifically to those other angles you were talking about. It seemed like you were raising the issue of the private interpretation of the joke between the hosts being harmless (if it was) and how we should weight that against a public perception of the joke being not harmless. My point was that when someone does something on television, they don’t get control over the public reaction to it, and that people are entitled to their reactions even if the individuals involved had a totally different intent and understanding. Sorry if I came across as hostile in any way.

4 Likes
207

If you get further into their post you find they don’t know the difference between homosexuals and transgender people. I should have paid attention to that “ignore the rest of this post” flag you mentioned.

3 Likes
208

Isn’t it funny how people who rant about “SJWs” are holistically terrible?

“Don’t know and don’t care” seems par for the course.

8 Likes
209

The certificate program there is “distance learning”, with only a summer seminar afterwards and then a comprehensive exam that must earn at least an 80% (3 tries allowed). It’s not a degree program.

However, a Master’s in Public Health is a real degree. Why in the world is she reading cue cards for the weather spot on a local TV news program?

2 Likes
210

Late stage capitalism?

7 Likes
211

Because it pays a lot more than working in public health, and is a higher-status job.

Our society’s incentive structure is deeply fucked.

9 Likes
212

Sadly, I’m sure you’re both right.

3 Likes
213

Okay, I’ll start with your Rosa Parks theory because there is an excellent example that refutes it, which is the case of Tanya Rosenblit who refused to sit at the back of a bus riding along a line mostly used by orthodox jews. This case has led to a very effective discussion which is now making the power of gender segregationists crumble. No endless discussions about how she was too lazy to go to the back of the bus, etc.
You see, if we want to achieve changes, we must concentrate our forces on those cases that actually have so much controversy that they give us a chance to win hands down. A case like the sweater story only gives the other side an chance to laugh us out as paranoid, humourless people who want to regulate every aspect of human life. We must be able to take a joke we don’t really think is appropriate because you see, the large majority of people will never ever see the side of someone who is oppressed until the issue is undeniable. When you see a black person sot by police on a cellphone video, you have an opportunity to act. When you seek out every instance where a black person (or woman) is misrepresented in advertisement, you create the impression that you’re just digging in the dirt and you will never make a case. When you react to false alarms, it’s even worse.

The sweater joke was, as it looks, at the expense of biggots who think women should cover themselves. It wasn’t a private joke, as you say, but a public one and the target wasn’t the wheather reporter but those people who are pushing forward a new puritanism and who are judging a woman on her appearance only. The wave of concern, though, completely blew that message away. I would even suspect that a great part of the people who express their concern are exactly those biggots who would like women to dress ‘modestly’ and only speak when they’re asked. Those people love to turn the tables and accuse the other side of injustice and you are playing along with them if you ride on that wave.

Oh, btw: correct me if I’m wrong but it seem like other sources of news that strongly promote gender equality, like The Mary Sue or TYT, have either not taken notice of or plainly avoided this event.

214

The fact that it’s completely plausible is the joke. It’s a practical joke on the expense of biggots. They should be the ones raging now.

215

No accounting for taste I guess.

I don’t find “practical jokes” funny when they have no setup or punchline. This to me looks more like a practical joke played on Liberte that backfired.

In anycase, I wasn’t so much outraged as disappointed at the awful execution. It’s not clearly a joke until long after the broadcast when you do some digging to see the participant’s explanation. Until then it just looks at worst like a news room caving in to troglodytes’ demands. And at best maybe some ribbing between co-workers.

3 Likes
216

As I said, I don’t think the execution was awful. Quite on the contrary. I’m also sure there is no ribbing between co-workers here. If you read her point of view, you will see that it’s not the case.

I think you’re taking things way too much the no-laughing-matter way.

I’ve been with the socially engaged left for decades now, so I think I know where the outrage is coming from.

217

I’ll take two issues with this. The first is that from a purely Machiavellian get-things-done standpoint I think you are wrong. There have been plenty of videos of police shooting black people who were obviously not threatening. John Crawford is probably the most outrageous example. The police just ran in an shot him dead, no warning. He wasn’t even doing anything remotely ranging on illegal, he was just shopping at a WalMart. It’s all on tape. No indictment. No admission from the FOX News crowd that in this case the police should have thought twice. No hands-down win. Change will happen on an issue when the majority of people are sick of the current situation, not when the right incident that proves a point comes along. Concentrating on cases where public opinion is clearly on one side is fighting only wars that are already won.

In 2011 with Tanya Rosenblit I guess Israel was ready for a change with respect to gender discrimination. It was, after all, 2011 in a modern democracy - about 100 years overdue. The USA is obviously not ready for a change with respect to police killing young black men.

“Political Correctness” won in the 1980s/90s. To borrow a phrase from Neil MacDonald (a Canadian journalist and Norm MacDonald’s brother) , political correctness turned out to be “early onset politeness”. Sure, people were made fun of for being too sensitive, but things got moved forward.

Which is why I go back to the sweater thing being not a false alarm. Imagine instead on a newscast someone jokingly called someone else a “retard”. Would we say, “Oh, it was just a joke, no harm done” or would we say, “That insult is very hurtful to people with developmental disabilities.”? Jokes can hurt people who aren’t in on the joke. If you don’t understand why this joke was hurtful to people, the best way to understand is to listen to people who were hurt by it.

Which brings me to my second issue, that being the question of who “we” are and why “we” need to focus our efforts. This connects to your previous statement about the culture of outrage not being authentic. If women watched this segment and were upset by it, why shouldn’t they say, “That was upsetting to me.”? That’s being authentic. If a movement is going to accomplish empowering individuals to be themselves regardless of their sex, race, gender identity, sexual orientation, etc., then I think it has to start from the ground up by respecting everyone who is part of it.

When someone comes in and says, “You’re doing it wrong, let’s run this political movement the way I think it should be run,” that lacks credibility because it shuts down the voices that it is supposedly trying to empower. You can’t implement respect for women by telling women to be quiet about their real feelings and wait until the war is won - at which point they will presumably finally be entitled to their feelings.

Also, you are indeed wrong about The Mary Sue and TYT not covering this. Both did.

13 Likes
218

[quote=“m_a_t, post:213, topic:78120”]
he sweater joke was, as it looks, at the expense of biggots who think women should cover themselves[/quote]
The joke was at her expense. It was validating creeps, you don’t know how “jokes” work. Straight punch-down and she was the punchline.

The bigoted laughed, because they were the targeted audience. People who think women shouldn’t be patronized by dudes got mad, because that was the intention of the joke.

Your rationale is not what happened in planning and execution. If the joke was bigots, they would’ve brought up the emails and said “we love her and respect her and y’all can pound sand”. Instead, she got called immodest and their views were validated and she was called out on air in this stunt.

Grow up, seriously.

7 Likes
219

For the whole post:

The Mary Sue
TYT

5 Likes
220

I respect your legitimate engagement about the issue thematized by the event. Those are issues I am just as worried about as you are, but think again. He hands her a grey vest. What can be more obviously making fun of the biggots who are sending the eMails. Now if you want to rant about these biggots, I’m all with you, also in association to that event. But if, I say it again, you take the event itself at face value and critisize the fact that the wheather reporter was jokingly haded a grey vest, sorry but you’re taking the wind out of your own sails. I repeat: the whole point of the little sketch seems to have been denounce the biggotry of some viewers who possibly incessantly harrass the station with emails about how the reporter should be clad more decently or modestly and I honestly don’t believe that most people who take offence at this joke are genuinely concerned with the issue it is directed at.
Of course jokes can hurt people who aren’t in on the joke but this is not the case here. She made a statement and ignoring that statement is objectifying her for one’s own cause. It’s a good cause, I repeat it, but it should be fought truthfully.

221

[Once again:] (Personal Thoughts on the LBD/Sweater Moment that Went Viral | Life of Liberté)

During the 8am hour, my co-anchor came over and handed me a sweater and said, “we’re getting a lot of emails.” I was surprised since I hadn’t seen any of the emails and didn’t think there was anything that inappropriate (the beads/sequins were probably a little much for the morning, but what girl doesn’t like something that sparkles?!), so I played along and put on the sweater.

That does not sound like someone who’s “in on the joke.”

Who here is “ignoring the statement?”

8 Likes
222

Okay, okay. I’m usually up-to-date with both news sources. seems like these two appeared during my holiday.

On a side note, I don’t get the loud cheering here. I’m not Humbabella’s adversary and this isn’t a football match either. I mean seriously, this is exactly the issue I was addressing in my first comment: how people take important social topics and behave like this was some kind of football game.

223

What I meant is that she wasn’t hurt.

224

And you’re cheerleading for the sexists here, which is why you’ve received the response that you did to your justification for the “joke”.