Sexism or Satire?
"Just joking" continued...
There's been so much coverage of the David Letterman joke regarding Sarah Palin's daughter and Alex Rodriguez that I wasn't sure where to begin posting about it--also difficult to find any coverage that wasn't fairly partisan. But here's a recent summary from YahooNews/Associated Press: Sarah Palin accepts David Letterman's apology.
Another related story: A South Carolina Repulican Activist made the following remark on his facebook account in regard to a gorilla that had escaped from the Columbia SC zoo: "“I’m sure it’s just one of Michelle’s ancestors - probably harmless.” And his later apology: "“I am as sorry as I can be if I offended anyone. The comment was clearly in jest.”
Post-Racialism in the Republican Party (from "The Moderate Voice")
Ramsey's portrayal of female interviewer
The picture that Ramsey displayed and the verbal description of the interviewer Tracey Grimshaw are clearly meant as an insult, plain and simple. Ramsey and his publicist claiming that it is meant as a joke is just a lame attempt to recover from what looks like a PR disaster for him. I did a google of his name and Grimshaw's together to see how it's being covered and couldn't find anyone besides Ramsey and his publicist supporting the view that it's a joke. The "Daily Mail" and Fox News both refer to Ramsey's "putrid tirade"--neither outlet known for taking stands against sexism in the media generally.
GC, you mentioned a debate regarding sexism in entertainment--can you link up where the debate's going on 'cause at first glance I can't find anyone taking his side apart from a couple people who were interviewed at the event where he made the remark and displayed the picture (there seemed to be an equal number of people quoted in the article who were turned off by what he did as well--and these are his fans).
On the more general question--are these "isms" ever funny. I guess I think of humor, particularly satire in fact, to be directed at human flaws like vanity or arrogance and it works particularly well for those who aren't in positions of power and authority to use against those who are--as a critique that might bring about change. And to give an example of the way in which sexism and satire were used together to supposedly create humor--I can think of all those 18th century satirists whose main target was female vanity. Though this is satire--it is clearly sexist in that it makes a generalization about all women (and leaves men exempt) and also "naturalizes" vanity by seeing it as a female quality rather than seeing it as part of the system which requires women to care about their looks for their own survival. I'm sure some people find that funny, but anyone who sees the larger perspective is going to see that what needs to be made fun of is the system itself--and that in fact satirists like Jonathan Swift and Alexander Pope--far from doing the job of satire (to critique and bring about change) were perpetuating the system. And in fact that is what some female satirists (Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, for instance) did in their replies to people like Jonathan Swift (Montagu's satiric replies to Swift implied that his attempts to be humorous at women's expense were based in his own insecurities about how successful he was in his romantic endeavors)--which actually is kind of what Grimshaw does to Ramsey in her reply. Now that's funny.
Stereotypes and humor
I wanted to pull this point out for a separate conversation.
I think one way in which comedy works is by taking something which would otherwise be painful or provocative to talk about or examine and make it funny. It takes things we might otherwise feel fearful about (like death) or that we might feel defensive about (our own foibles) and gives us a way to explore them.
Stereotypes work by taking a quality and assigning it to an entire group of people as if that's an essential part of their nature--and hides the way in which that quality might have been produced in many people within that group because of particular historical or cultural circumstances.
Sexist or racist humor plays on stereotypes and it triggers the response of being found humorous or funny because it's often bringing up some quality that's been assigned to the group--like women being competitive, manipulative, vain in order to get a man--which people are either fearful of or critical of (jokes about black people as "gangstas" or Asians all being super achievers would be other examples of this kind of joke). Instead of exploring where that quality or behavior comes from, though, this kind of humor reinforces the idea that it's an essential part of the nature of anyone from that group.
So I guess the way that remark of Gordon Ramsey's is supposed to work is to imply that any woman who doesn't fawn all over him, or just asks him questions straightforwardly (she didn't in any way seem to be giving him a hard time) is extremely unattractive (a pig) or isn't attracted to men.
But why it doesn't work--and why the joke turns out to be on him--is that the implication of that is that the only thing keeping a female interviewer from being critical of him is the fact that his physical charms usually keep them in some kind of emotional thrall. So what really gets exposed in this exchange is how vulnerable to criticism and how defensive Ramsey is.
David Letterman revisited
I liked Nell Scovell's take on David Letterman's admission of having had sexual relations with his female employees. Scovell, a former writer for Letterman but not one of the women he was sexually involved with, contrasts her own response and that of Joy Behar with the rest of the media:
"Most media stars responded by defending one of their own. On The View, Barbara Walters remarked that Dave “is a very attractive man” and offered a blanket excuse for his in-house affairs: “Where do you meet people? In the workplace.” Joy Behar took a tougher stance and argued that his behavior might have created an atmosphere that’s uncomfortable for other female employees, especially “if you’re one of the girls who works there and [are] just doing your job.” But Walters had little sympathy for the working girls. “Maybe you’re annoyed today, but that’s not necessarily sexual harassment,” Walters said. “It isn’t sexual harassment,” she added.
Actually, it may be. There’s a subset of sexual harassment called sexual favoritism that, according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, can lead to a “hostile work environment,” often “creating an atmosphere that is demeaning to women.”
And that pretty much sums up my experience at Late Night with David Letterman."
She also looks at what happened in the larger context of late night tv where there are very few female writers:
"Now, I don’t want a lawsuit. I don’t want compensation. I don’t want revenge. I don’t want Dave to go down (oh, grow up, people). I just want Dave to hire some qualified female writers and then treat them with respect. And that goes for Jay and Conan, too."
Letterman and Me
Contrast that with Tom Shales writing for "The Washington Post" (Let's remember that Letterman's a clown, not a cleric or congressman):
"Could Letterman's misbehavior be compared to the disreputable legislator who ranted and railed against homosexuals, and worked to deny them the right to marry and other civil privileges -- and then was caught soliciting anonymous sex in an airport men's room? That's socially destructive misconduct with the potential for inflicting harm, pain and injustice on a portion of society and on society at large. Letterman's misadventures contain potential harm, pain and injustice only for the individuals specifically involved -- and since there have been no allegations about the sex having been nonconsensual or any partners having been underage, it's all unpleasant but hardly some sort of threat to the public welfare."
It isn't just individual. This seems to me to be one of the biggest impediments to talking about sexism--because it has to do with gender and sexuality people generally talk about "misconduct" as being personal rather than social.