Comedian Michelle Wolf sparks fury, debate with roast at correspondents' dinner

[lmachine]

I would not for a moment doubt that some young men probably did make puerile and indecent remarks about my daughters. My daughters are attractive and young men do that, and while I would not tolerate it in my presence, (and young men know that and refrain) it has never led to violence.

Knowing what Donald Trump has said about women and his history of sexual assault would you be more or less likely to let one of your daughters spend time alone with him?

I don’t know if you are a man or a woman. But I will say if you are a man you have surely been cloistered up in a monastery, raised by nobody but nuns your entire life and have never run “with the boys”, ever.

This is such a telling thing to say. The kind of talk Trump was engaged in is totally normal, all men do it, it’s no big deal. This kind of attitude is why so many women are sexually victimized.

But it’s extremely common, and has nothing whatever to do with hatred of women, let alone violence toward them.

Sexual assault is extremely common. That doesn’t mean it’s okay.

As I have also said before, I have heard women say worse things. Much worse.

So? You’ve heard women say bad things so all men are allowed to say bad things too? I’ve been accused of moral relativism before but geez.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Except, of course, that he didn’t say he sexually assaulted anyone.

 

[lmachine]

Except, of course, that he didn’t say he sexually assaulted anyone.

He doesn’t have to, about 20 women have come forward to detail Trump’s sexual assaults.

 

[Inisfallen]

But it’s extremely common, and has nothing whatever to do with hatred of women, let alone violence toward them.

Quite possibly true. But contempt for women, rather than hatred, or violence? Quite possibly.

 

[Inisfallen]

But I will say if you are a man you have surely been cloistered up in a monastery, raised by nobody but nuns your entire life and have never run “with the boys”, ever.

Can’t speak for lmachine, but I was raised by my mother. And by my father, who I never heard speak like that. And educated by Jesuits, who would not have tolerated that kind of talk for one second, even from high school boys.

So I never spoke like that about women. Never.

And I did plenty of “running with the boys.”

 

[Ridgerunner]

Knowing what Donald Trump has said about women and his history of sexual assault would you be more or less likely to let one of your daughters spend time alone with him?

My daughters can take care of themselves. Also, I remember immediately after the “locker room talk” he and the reporter greeted a woman and Trump was perfectly gentlemanly toward her. Talk is one thing. Actions are another.

This is such a telling thing to say. The kind of talk Trump was engaged in is totally normal, all men do it, it’s no big deal. This kind of attitude is why so many women are sexually victimized.

The only men I know who have never talked this way are a few of the religious fundamentalists.

Sexual assault is extremely common. That doesn’t mean it’s okay.

Assault is extremely common. Sexual assault is not very common. Ask some cops or a prosecutor.

So? You’ve heard women say bad things so all men are allowed to say bad things too? I’ve been accused of moral relativism before but geez.

That wouldn’t be moral relativism even if it was true. My point was that vulgar talk does not, in itself, incline anyone to sexual violence. Talk to a shrink. They’ll tell you sexual violence is related to hatred engendered by some kind of abusive relationship in the past, or just plain sociopathic psychology

Assault is extremely common and nearly as common by women as by men. Ask a cop or a prosecutor.

 

[Ridgerunner]

And educated by Jesuits, who would not have tolerated that kind of talk for one second, even from high school boys.

Then you never heard them talk among themselves. I went to a Jesuit university, and sometimes they turned the air blue even in the presence of male students.

 

[F_Marturana]

My daughters can take care of themselves. Also, I remember immediately after the “locker room talk” he and the reporter greeted a woman and Trump was perfectly gentlemanly toward her. Talk is one thing. Actions are another.

It’s already ridiculous he forgot he had his microphone while talking to Billy Bush I can’t imagine he was supposed to forget he was on camera when he met the actress.

 

[Inisfallen]

The only men I know who have never talked this way are a few of the religious fundamentalists.

My experience is different. As I said above, my father never talked that way. His friends never spoke that way. His brother never spoke that way. My mother’s brothers never spoke that way, and they were hard men (two Marines, served in Vietnam, one Navy pilot, also served in Vietnam, was awarded the Navy Cross) never spoke that way, and if they had, my mother would have torn them a new one, as they say. I remember the men around the family. Good men, religious men, ranging from what you’d call “liberal” Catholics to Opus Dei members. They never spoke that way. The good men (Jesuit priests and lay teachers) who educated me never spoke that way.

Be that as it may, Trump’s words on that tape never got me all that angry. Not a big deal. As I’ve said before, we here in New York City already knew this guy.

 

[Ridgerunner]

It’s so cute when you pretend to be impartial.

Oh, I make no pretense of being impartial. I only said there are three liberals on here of whom I think well personally, despite their unfortunate political leanings.

 

[Inisfallen]

Then you never heard them talk among themselves. I went to a Jesuit university, and sometimes they turned the air blue even in the presence of male students.

Different schools, different faculty.

Sure, I heard some priests (more likely scholastics, actually) curse up a blue streak. But I never heard them speak crudely or disrespectfully about women.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Yes. Our experience is different, but not entirely.

My father was a member of the Holy Name Society back in the days when it still existed. (It might still exist somewhere) The whole point of the Society was to not take the Lord’s name in vain. But it extended to other "cussing’ as well, though not explicitly so. My father had a number of expressions that substituted.

I do remember that when I attended a Jesuit university there were some of the young men who were more circumspect in their speech, but not many, and they all seemed to have come from one school. I went to public high school, and that was new to me.

But what I’m saying now is as true as the sky. When I was in that Jesuit university I heard Jesuits use language every bit as crude as Trump’s conversation with that reporter. Since I went to a public high school, I had never heard priests talk like that before. But there were plenty of young men who had attended Catholic schools who had.

Sure, I heard some priests (more likely scholastics, actually) curse up a blue streak. But I never heard them speak crudely or disrespectfully about women.

There were no scholastics where I attended. I heard scatological crudity aplenty. but I did not hear any of them say anything vulgar about women. Disrespectful, yes indeed, including toward female faculty members. But vulgar about women, not that I recall.

 

[Inisfallen]

There were no scholastics where I attended. I heard scatological crudity aplenty. but I did not hear any of them say anything vulgar about women. Disrespectful, yes indeed, including toward female faculty members. But vulgar about women, not that I recall.

Ok, good to know, we’re on the same page here. Not so much about disrespectful language towards female faculty members (we only had one women on the faculty in my Jesuit high school, and in my time at a Jesuit college, I know there were women on the faculty, but I can’t remember any man on the faculty saying anything about them one way or the other).

 

[lmachine]

Also, I remember immediately after the “locker room talk” he and the reporter greeted a woman and Trump was perfectly gentlemanly toward her. Talk is one thing. Actions are another.

Nearly 20 women have described Donald Trump sexually assaulting or harassing them. Do those actions count for anything? You seem to think men get to say whatever and hold any opinions they want about women as long as they don’t break the boy’s club silence and let women in on the “joke”.

The only men I know who have never talked this way are a few of the religious fundamentalists.

Seek out better men.

Assault is extremely common. Sexual assault is not very common. Ask some cops or a prosecutor.

It’s not surprising that someone defending joking about sexually assaulting women is attempting to minimize the problem of sexual assault. Not to mention the well-documented problem of cops and prosecutors under-reporting, under-investigating, and generally dismissing sexual assault as a crime.

My point was that vulgar talk does not, in itself, incline anyone to sexual violence.

It just lets those who are inclined to violence know that what they’re doing is just a funny joke to other men.

It’s already ridiculous he forgot he had his microphone while talking to Billy Bush I can’t imagine he was supposed to forget he was on camera when he met the actress.

And it’s ignoring the way Billy Bush made his bizarre comments to encourage the actress to hug Trump. It’s textbook creepy behavior.

 

[petra22]

really knock it, you know, you gotta get that baby out of there.

I didn’t think the left considered the pregnancy a “baby”? Just curious… That was really shocking to me…

 

[Ridgerunner]

Ok, good to know, we’re on the same page here.

Yup. That’s where I learned to say “pogue ma thoin”. From a Jesuit.

Searching memory here. It was really not possible to take Chaucer or Shakespeare and not have a Jesuit (I took both from Jesuits) talk about, um, relations with women and even female body parts, e.g. “if the hart do after hind, let him seek out Rosalind”, "It’s her hand. I can tell by her "c"s, her “u"s 'n her___” or the Wife of Bath’s dissertation on her “belle chose”. And what does “queynte” in Chaucer really mean?

And it was attended by a certain degree of levity, as I recall. So I can’t say for sure that no Jesuit ever joked about any of those literary references. To my knowledge, none of them was a Mayflower Puritan, so it wouldn’t surprise me if they did.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I guess we all can’t be as lucky as you and whatever place you live where apparently sexual assault is hilarious.

Where I live you can easily get killed for sexually assaulting someone, so it’s not hilarious at all. But talk and action are not the same thing.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Sure, it will. I like the fake toughness to go with the ‘boys will be boys’ attitude.

No. It has nothing to do with “toughness”, fake or otherwise. It has to do with local culture.

 

[Inisfallen]

Yup. That’s where I learned to say “pogue ma thoin”. From a Jesuit.

Searching memory here. It was really not possible to take Chaucer or Shakespeare and not have a Jesuit (I took both from Jesuits) talk about, um, relations with women and even female body parts, e.g. “if the hart do after hind, let him seek out Rosalind”, "It’s her hand. I can tell by her "c"s, her “u"s 'n her___” or the Wife of Bath’s dissertation on her “belle chose”. And what does “queynte” in Chaucer really mean?

And it was attended by a certain degree of levity, as I recall. So I can’t say for sure that no Jesuit ever joked about any of those literary references. To my knowledge, none of them was a Mayflower Puritan, so it wouldn’t surprise me if they did.

Look, I don’t want to do this all night. As I’ve said a couple of times, the whole Billy Bush thing didn’t mean much to me one way or the other.

But can we agree that a professor discussing the bawdy bits of Chaucer (and let’s not even start about the Mabinogion, or the marginalia left in plenty of medieval manuscripts by bored monks in the scriptorium) is different from a man talking about “grabbing, etc. . . .”? Maybe Trump was joking. Maybe he wasn’t. We each have our own ideas about that.

It doesn’t matter anymore. He was elected. He’s the president. Obviously enough people were unconcerned about his language then to elect him president. So be it. I wasn’t going to vote for him even before I heard that recording.

It has little to do with Michelle Wolf’s routine at the WHCA dinner. And I’ve pretty much said everything I have to say about that.

Once again, tempest in a teapot.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I agreed “tempest in a teapot” from the very first. I only noted my amusement.

I’m finished for the night anyway. Be of good cheer.