Why Lady Gaga and Terry Richardson Should (But Won't) Halt the Release of the Video for "Do What U Want"
film / tv / lists / guides / news / love / celeb / video / think pieces / staff / podcasts / web culture / politics / dc / snl / netflix / marvel / cbr

Why Lady Gaga and Terry Richardson Should (But Won't) Halt the Release of the Video for "Do What U Want"

By Courtney Enlow | Think Pieces | December 18, 2013 | Comments ()


The thing about yesterday’s news, that R. Kelly is a predator, sexually preying on young girls, children, is that it isn’t news. We knew this. We just…forgot. Or ignored.

How could we forget? How could we ignore?

It can’t be something as simple as talent, as Art overshadowing Man. Otherwise, Roman Polanski would be living happily on American soil right now. Tragically, horrifically, Kelly’s abhorrent, unspeakable deeds are more in line with Woody Allen. Rich, talented man abusing child of color. And we focus solely on the more comfortably salacious details, like golden showers and *hilarious* incest. We laugh. We laugh and we don’t consider what it really is we’re laughing about. And, in the case of Kelly, hundreds of young woman, many of them young girls, are ignored. Forgotten.

How could we do that to them? How could we consent to and supplement his ability to continue hurting these girls, aiding and abetting through iTunes downloads?

We separate Man from Artist as though it’s somehow the right thing to do, but how can that be, especially when this man’s Art speaks to the Man so deeply, his songs entrenched in sexual demands and a proudly voracious appetite for young flesh? How does the Art not disturb us to our very core?

And that’s why Lady Gaga and Terry Richardson need to call this video a loss and walk away. Because there is no way it won’t be unspeakably disturbing in light of Jim DeRogatis’s reminder of who exactly R. Kelly is and what he has done.

I was disturbed by this collaboration from the beginning. Many of you know that I am an unabashed Gaga lover, descending into a shrieking caps lock monster at the mere mention of her name. And I like the song, I actually like what it’s saying. But who she’s saying it with changes the song. She’s professing ownership over her physical being while lamenting the industry’s fixation on a woman’s body, but given that we know what he does with the bodies of young girls, it doesn’t sound like that anymore when his verse comes along. And, from what we’ve seen thus far of the video, given what we knew, what we already knew, it’s not right.

These girls, these victims, have been ignored, forgotten and laughed at for years. I implore all of us to consider that, to do the tiny things we can to help the situation, to think of these people for whom justice wasn’t an option when money was on the line.

Do what u want, Terry and Gaga. But that won’t make it OK.

Colin Farrell's Last Romantic Relationship Was With Whom? | The 10 Best Television Drama Episodes of 2013

Comments Are Welcome, Bigots and Trolls Are Not

  • I'm disappointed in Gaga for choosing to collaborate with both of these predatory perverts. She's never been on a pedestal for me, but it seems like she at least TRIES to exhibit some sense of moral responsibility and sensitivity in her messaging and public persona. It's great that she's vocal about gay rights and body image, but she needs to realize that gay rights are human rights, and she undermines herself as a messenger when she aligns with people who brazenly and repeatedly violate the human rights of another population (in this case, women and underage girls).

    If Gaga wants all people to love, accept and respect themselves in all of their "born this way" glory, she needs to dissociate herself from those who prey on fear, insecurity and vulnerability to get themselves off.

  • kiniki

    As much as it pains me to say this, considering I think R Kelly is a tool... But he was found not guilty on all counts. Whilst I think he probably did do most of the things he was accused of, until someone proves it, aside from personal feelings, he is well within his rights to carry on his career (such as it is).

  • Agreed; Kelly has every right to carry on like a free man when he is, in fact, a free man. That said, when you read the reporting and documentation around the allegations (http://blogs.villagevoice.com/... ), it's hard to conclude that the justice system worked as intended. This seems very clearly another case of a rich and powerful man, surrounded by savvy attorneys, exploiting every last angle of criminal procedure to delay justice, muddy the waters, and wear down his grossly over-matched accusers

    So yes, he has every legal right to pursue his career, and short of imprisonment, legal sanctions or violent/criminal activity against R. Kelly, we have every right to hinder that pursuit by slamming the door in his face.

  • GDI

    Well, in Allen's case, miss Previn was 19 at the time. Certainly above the legal age (not any less uncomfortable, even if they aren't directly related) and no real non-consensual interaction.
    Polanski's case has allegations of rape, through and through. Large difference there.
    As for R. Kelly, he payed off the women and their families off when they sued him. And they settled.
    Race is the outlier in the comparison, not the primary issue. If we are going down that route, then shouldn't R. Kelly be jailed on virtue of being a black man?

    Not to say that R. Kelly should have been allowed to walk free (or jailed just because he is black). At the very least, he should've been tried and convicted for statutory rape. I've heard of child porn being involved, but I haven't found anything concrete. If so, holy shit. Money can really buy you freedom.

    At the very least, Ian Watkins and his 2 accomplices are getting getting some hefty sentences at least. Although, in this case, I really do believe that a life sentence or capital punishment is far too lenient for what transpired.

  • becks2point0

    Allen molested his other, younger daughter before he ran away with Soon Yi. The other daughter was Dylan, I believe, and was about 6 years old when that happened. No one would believe Mia or the housekeeper at the time but Dylan has begun to talk about it now.

    Allen also most likely was acting inappropriately with Soon Yi before she was of age. He waited to take things public but there was already a very established relationship by all accounts. Oh, and let's not forget how Mia found out. He'd left vulgar, nude photos of Mia's daughter out on his mantle for her to stumble upon. Truly lovely man.

    I only know all of the details about him because I really like his movies so I have to keep reminding myself who he really is so that I don't give him my money.

  • GDI

    Did not know about Dylan. The details I found left me feeling cold and bitter.
    Just, wow.

    Yeah, his history with Soon Yi is obviously unsettling without knowledge of his prior conduct. I knew about the established relationship, but the way he outed it? Ugh. It is so damn disgusting.
    Never been a fan of Woody Allen and never will be.

  • Jessie Soto

    I think what bothers me so much about this is I have friends who went to Kenwood (I went to Lane Tech on the other side of town), where this story is folklore. These are woman who are my age, so we would have been 15 at the time this was going on, women I consider my peers. Then I look at my 12 year old daughter--a bright, smart girl. She's half white half Hispanic, but she doesn't look Hispanic at all, and she's been privileged to grow up in a nice suburb just outside of Chicago, but then I think of my niece, who's almost the same age, goes to an inner city Chicago school and loves this kind of "baby let me sex you up" music. (She also said she wanted to be a video girl when she grows up.  Yes she has a crappy upbringing, but that's a different conversation).  She'd be an easy target for Kelly, or whatever good looking black singer/rapper/regular guy she idolises that might have a preference for young Hispanic/Black girls. It breaks my heart. Girls who grow up in these areas (like me), vulnerable girls, they're slim picking for a dirt bag like this. The fact that Cook County didn't prosecute him for rape and instead went for a bullshit child pornography charge, the fact that these girls were pressured to settle their suits in a civil court because they didn't think they would find justice in a criminal system, the fact that the school must have heard about these things going on but didn't do anything because he was their star pupil, speaks volumes about the value of women of minority to the City of Chicago. And it's disgusting. I'm actually looking up if there is a way to have him brought back to court, that's how indignant I feel about it. I can guarantee you, if Kelly had abused a girl like my daughter, he would not be recording duets with Lady Gaga right now, he'd be playing "drop the soap" on 26th and California.

  • Kommerzschlampe
  • His history of sexually abusing women was all I could think about when I heard his new song with Gaga, and I spent a good five minutes making fish face trying to puzzle out how anyone thought it was a good idea.

  • Danar the Barbarian

    I didn't forget. I never forget when celebrities are abusive, sick, and destructive. I file them away in the drawer of my brain that reads "SCUMBAGS: Do Not Feed". And then I never give them a penny of my money ever again. I'm getting older and am losing the ability to access these drawers as quickly as I used to so I may actually commit the list to paper. Seriously - stop paying them and they will go away.

  • mzblackwidow

    not being a fan of any of the people involved, I just read the lyrics to this song of Lady Gaga's. I have to say, I don't see it as clearly stating her ownership of herself, to me it sends mixed messages at best and sounds like Miley Cyrus licking a hammer looked, at worst.
    As for the men she chose to collaborate with, unless she is a genuine moron (I know nothing about her, seriously. Is she? ) there is no way she decided on 2 pedophile rapists to work with, singing those lyrics, by coincidence.

    To the whole issue I say - yuk ! Just when Miley sightings were finally slowing down, now there is this *sigh

  • Sean

    I think that you are under the impression that they have a choice. Gaga's career is basically over. Her record company is desperate to try to recoup some money that they wasted on her latest recording. Even bad publicity is still publicity.

  • Sara_Tonin00

    That's kinda of a reverse argument, since the album with the R Kelly song is the album not doing well.

  • Bad Superman

    What about the core issue of how and why the R. Kelly's and Chris Brown's of this world have so many willing partners?

  • Danar the Barbarian

    Two prongs of the same fork: How to keep abusers from harming their victims (and how to prevent them from ever becoming abusive in the first place!) -- And how to teach the would-be victims to avoid the predators. Sounds like a full plate to me. Not even sure where to start. Maybe dessert first?

  • GDI

    It would require some absolutely cold-hearted and pragmatic decision making, while not being blinded by money and power.

    A lot of extreme self-sacrifice on the part of victims and would-be victims would be required (sucks that the onus is generally on the victims, but shoot on sight is generally frowned upon).

  • gorge jung

    One of Beyonces new video was done by Terry Richardson. Not a bad video just seems it was made for 14yo girls.

  • Sean

    It was.

  • If it's any consolation, R. Kelly is playing the predator in the song. The song's about the predatory media and how it uses and abuses popstars. His verse is the "media".

    I'm a huge fan and didn't know what R. Kelly did before Gaga announced their collab. I honestly wish she wouldn't have worked with him but I can't change things now. Unfortunately, Gaga seems to be really naive when it comes to other people and only looks for the "good" in people. She's under the impression everyone can change. Sigh.

    At the same time, the industry loves to protect these people and bury what they've done, so it's very possible that a lot of people do not know what these guys have done. Unlike us common folk, celebrities don't spend lots of time online researching because they have a career and not a lot of time on their hands. If only these women had teams who actually cared about them and spoke up about what these guys have done.

  • GDI

    Then you wouldn't have female popstars.

  • MarTeaNi

    What's she going to do next, get Phil Spector to produce her next album? She's got a punch card of creepitude to work with before she can a gift card to American Apparel.

  • SamuraiShampoo

    If Gaga actually cared she wouldn't be working with scumbags like Kelly and Richardson in the first place. All she cares about is how much attention she gan get out of the situation.

  • Pretty much every major pop girl and dozens of other celebs have worked with him. Is it the same for them?

  • GDI

    She attempts to be portrayed as a "serious" pop artist with some weird meta perspective and "artistic" approach, while she doesn't even come close to proving that style. She's being hyper-materialistic and plastic with no commentary or satire.

    There wouldn't be a problem if it wasn't for overt agenda of being so "progressive" (in the musical sense, not the political).

    She tries so hard to stand out and actually succeeds on that front, in a very superficial way.

    It's awful, because she is insanely insecure and neurotic. I feel for her, even if I think her work as Lady Gaga is utter tripe.
    This series of events affords me less and less sympathy for her. I wish she would draw some ethical line in the sand. She's a much larger star than R. Kelly currently, why should she have to stoop to this level?

  • Tatertot

    Someday, some actress or pop star or model will have enough clout and self-respect to refuse to work with Richardson and tell him to fuck off back under his rock.

    That day, that woman will receive a standing ovation from me and I will buy everything she has ever done.

  • Sara_Tonin00

    They probably have. We just don't hear about them. Because they don't get the attention of having their photos taken. And because the ones with enough thought to say "fuck off, Richardson, don't take creepy baby photos of me" probably aren't the ones to broadcast it everywhere.

    And at @anthagio - even if the industry has buried whatever crimes Richardson has committed (and I haven't heard of them before) people can still SEE HIS ACTUAL CREEPY PHOTOS.

  • Tatertot

    I hope that's true because it's awesome to think someone somewhere in the industry had the ovaries to call him on his shit

  • Aaron Schulz

    I think someone did, and i could swear it was like a reality star chick, or maybe megan fox, shit i cant remember and maybe this is a fevered dream but i could swear someone said no to him because hes disgusting.

  • Mhm, but I don't think that'll happen. The industry protects him and buries what he does so actresses don't know. All they know is he's some high-profile photographer and working with him will help their career.

  • Tatertot

    Depressing, but true. I guess I'll use my dollar and get a doughnut instead!

  • Sara_Tonin00


  • Mrs. Julien

    [walks in]
    [backs out slowly]

  • bastich

    Run! Save yourself!

  • Mrs. Julien

    Come with me, if you want to live.

  • Sara_Tonin00

    See you at the party, Richter.

    (this thread, btw, is the opposite of a party. It's kinda scaring me.)

  • zeke_the_pig

    And yet...I just can't stop reading...

  • Kommerzschlampe

    "There are times when I look at people and I see nothing worth liking."

  • Tatertot

    Damn....this is supposed to be an animated gif! I'll figure out how to post one someday!

  • It's too late. Resistance is futile.

    Gobble, gobble one of us.

  • Tatertot

    Oh, no you don't!

  • blarg

    The conversation between the dog & Uma Thurman is pretty funny

  • laylaness

    I have so many thoughts on this issue that I can't even process them into words, except to say that Terry Richardson is as disgusting as R. Kelly is anyway. And Gaga should be ashamed of herself for working with two sexual predators. Nice message to send to her "little monsters".

  • rio

    Yeah, I'm sure Terry Richardson is really worried about being linked to a sexual predator, oh wait, I'm sure the fact that he is one himself is gonna help him cope with the situation. While they were shooting the video he and Kelly were probably exchanging tips on how to coerce young girls into having sex with them. The only hope here is Gaga but since she worked with those two to begin with I won't hold my breath.

  • GDI

    They probably wouldn't see it as coerce, rather "scoring some young poon". I doubt either of them sees the error of there ways; but then again, most people don't.

    All mistakes were intentional.

  • Kommerzschlampe

    Let's not jump to conclusions until the little monsters weighed in on this, please! Kelly was probably born this way.

  • Melissa D

    Wow. That escalated quicker than the Price is Right yodelling mountain climber!

  • Considering Pajiba has been struck before by "concerned citizens" who have defended the likes of Chris Brown with all seriousness and righteousness, and considering we had several posts regarding Polanski, Allen, Orson Scott Card, Mel Gibson and other "problematic artists" with people falling all over the opinion map, Tatertot's questioning of your comment isn't without merit, and certainly does not call for ridicule.

  • JustOP

    'Dissenting opinions are not welcome here!'

  • Dissenting opinions are always welcome. If they weren't, they wouldn't be posted at all.

  • Tatertot

    God, this pile-on is so depressing. Thank you for your attempt at support, Vermillion!

  • Tatertot

    Thank you.

    I'm not trying to tell people that sarcasm is verboten when dealing with subjects like this, because it can be a highly effective tool and coping mechanism - and this site is, after all, "lightened by mock, and sweetened by droll". I'm just trying to get those who's reflexive instinct is to mock to give some consideration to context and the importance of clarity. This subject matter is ill-suited for subtlety and really requires a sledgehammer when it comes to sarcasm.

  • Kommerzschlampe

    This is exhausting. You guys know I'm a woman, right? I'm not sure it matters, but maybe it helps. If I may repeat what I wrote about AN HOUR ago adressed at Tatertot (see comment below):

    "Let's stop doing this, okay? We agree on the actual topic, don't we? R. Kelly is a despicable human being and the fact that Gaga sang a song with THOSE lyrics with him and posed for THAT photo is just horribly stupid. And also: Irony and the internet are a match made in hell. Okay?"

    Isn't that good enough? This is so pointless. What is this even about? There is no use keeping this "debate" going and ruining the comment section for an article WE ALL AGREE ON even further. There was a misunderstanding. We said what we needed to say, We're all strangers and obviously people have different perceptions of sarcasm, irony and humor.

    We ALL are THE GOOD GUYS here. No?


    PS: Dear Courtney, I'm so sorry. I wouldn't consider it censorship if you deleted everything following my original comment, so new commenters can focus on the actual topic.

  • Most of those defending Chris Brown on this site said they were women.

    I find it funny how your statement of your gender (as if being a woman means you can't possibly express a horrible opinion) after the "feeling like a terrible feminist" post.

    Look, you made a joke. You assumed that (out of a group of people who more than likely don't know you or your sense of humor) everyone would get that you were being facetious. And instead of just saying "hey, it was a joke" and letting it go, you doubled down on it by insulting somebody who, again, doesn't know you or your sense of humor and said as much. And then have the temerity to accuse them of being a troll.

    Look, I got the joke. But I also get why someone else would not. That is all.

  • (why am I getting into this?)

    well, Vermillion, to me that doesn't look like how it played out.

    She made a joke here*. She got insulted first, plus she also said "just a joke" and polite explanations.

    If you don't agree it's ok, but summarizing it all like you wrote... isn't really pretty, is it?

    *I'm pretty sure that if one comments on Pajiba making a pop-cultural joke, well, the Pajiba audience probably might get the pop-cultural reference. since...this is a..."pop-cultural referencing point of meeting", you know? it's not like she wrote this on the bark of a tree in a public park, and we're the first people passing by.

  • Tatertot

    How did I insult her?

    While Kommerzschlamp has been dismissive of my concerns, she has not insulted me and I appreciate that. Some her defenders have not been so considerate.

    I was told that my opinion about my personal reaction to something was “wrong”; that I “whined”; that I was overly concerned with “feeeeelings”; that I was “overly sensitive”, “sanctimonious”, and childish”; I was told to “give it a rest” (because shouldn’t I be over this now that the complete "wrongness” of my reaction has been reasonably
    pointed out to me?); I was accused of censorship for expressing a different opinion and suggesting that some others might want to consider how what they’re
    expressing might be interpreted by others; I was told that I obviously lack “reading comprehension”; called a “troll” and accused of “inciting nonsense”; and the all-time favorite – told that the problem is me because I either didn’t get an “obvious” joke, or got it but didn’t find it as funny as the commenter did.

    I find the word choices of these defenders disheartening in a thread about sexual predators and serial rapists because while I absolutely do not believe that these commenters are rape-apologists, the language they have chosen to use to dismiss me skates very, very close to the language used to belittle those who talk about this crap in any thread on any blog that discusses this type of subject.

    I find that very depressing.

  • Kommerzschlampe

    Go fuck yourself, drama queen.

  • JustOP

    Those five words were possibly the most satisfying thing I have read in days

  • Tatertot

    "There are times when I look at people and I see nothing worth liking."

  • JoeyPants

    You got what you trolled for. Congratulations. Is it as good as you thought it would be?

  • Tatertot

    Why do you think this is trolling and not an honest attempt to have a conversation about this? I'm not the one flinging insults and telling people to fuck off.

  • JoeyPants

    You have virtually no idea what a conversation is. You overreacted to a joke either because you were too stupid to get it (everyone else did) or because you wanted to drum up some mock outrage to make yourself seem morally superior to a complete stranger. Then you refused to back down and made petty cheap shots at someone who clearly has a stronger tie to reality than you in your "conversational" responses. That's pretty much what a troll is.

  • Tatertot

    "Petty cheap shots"? Could you provide examples? I've tried to be respectful to Kommerzschlamp and articulate my positions in a way that isn't personally insulting - a courtesy that has not been extended to me.

    I find it dismaying that the mere idea that a off-hand, casually sarcastic remark could be open to misinterpretation in a thread about a serial rapist and a sexual predator is so challenging to your world-view that it's not even open to consideration.

  • JoeyPants

    Here's an example where you took a cheap shot and were personally insulting...

    "Given the hot-button nature of this subject matter, it's better to safe than thought a raging douche."

    In my "world view" I think that anyone who misinterpreted the original comment from Kommerzschlampe is either an idiot or looking for an excuse to express faux outrage. You are entitled to your opinion but I find it to be laughably outside the pale of intelligent thought. I understand how you can find it "dismaying" that someone thinks that you are either stupid or morally deficient but that is exactly how I feel.

  • Tatertot

    Yes...I see how that choice of words could be taken personally. I had intended it humorously, but perhaps my sarcasm was too subtle.

    I find it interesting that you feel my initial reaction (which was based on consideration for how survivors might react to a joke that could also be read as an apology from a "fan") comes from a place of "moral deficiency". I wasn't the one arguing that victims of trauma don't deserve to have any considerations given to their feelings or reactions at all

  • JoeyPants

    "Yes...I see how that choice of words could be taken personally. I had intended it humorously, but perhaps my sarcasm was too subtle."

    If you were being sarcastic and see how it could be misconstrued, why didn't you apply the awesome internet sarcasm annotation system that you have constructed? Your original argument with Kommerzschlampe was that in cases of sarcastic ambiguity relating to this topic she was required to do this. You failed to live up to the same standard that you applied to someone else.

    Yes. You have officially been reverse trolled. It was nice playing with you.

  • Tatertot

    Oh, JoeyPants - you make me so sad.

  • JoeyPants

    I've been waiting for you to say this all day.

  • Tatertot


  • Kommerzschlampe

    I honestly can't believe I'm involved in this horseshit. If you are trolling me you got me good, seriously, and if you're not, I guess, I apologize for even suggesting you did. (I feel like adding "WHATEVER" but it seems too juvenile.) This was kind of a fun experience, though, it was new. For me. Anyway.

    So, Tartertard, I suggest you "Copy & Paste" my comments into a text file, read them again and try to get the chronology right. It's not how it is displayed here right now.

    I'm out. I'll end this endeavor with a quote from what Herman Melville called the greatest book ever written. It's kind of a tagline for the internet itself, I think.

    Ecclesiastes 7, 21

    "Don’t pay attention to everything people say, or you may hear your servant cursing you, for you know that many times you yourself have cursed others. All is futile, and a pursuit of the wind."


    PS: Dear PAJIBA, I'm so sorry. If I get banned for the choice of words in my last post, I will obviously accept it. Not gladly, but ... somehow. The cursing was clearly avoidable, I know, but it FELT necessary and really, really good, you know? Such a relief. At this point I'm not sure if anybody get's that I have a huge smile on my face writing this. It's so stupid.

  • Yeah, except a lot of people are lurkers or drive-by readers. Or just having an off day. So again, assuming that everyone is gonna get the joke is optimistic, but not realistic.

    I have seen enough folks make harmless jokes get eviscerated that I really stopped assuming that everyone is in on it. If people get it, yay. If they don't, oh well. If anything, this was pretty much a textbook case of Poe's Law: it was a good joke, but there are way too many people who actually say that same thing completely serious.

    And as I read it, both Tatertot and Kommerzschlampe (I think I sprained a finger typing that, how do you...nvm tangent) were actually quite respectful to start with. It wasn't until others got involved and treated Tatertot with little sympathy that I got involved.

  • Kommerzschlampe

    "Most of those defending Chris Brown on this site said they were women."

    I mentioned it because some other commenter referred to what I said as "his" comment.

    "And instead of just saying "hey, it was a joke" and letting it go, you doubled down on it by insulting somebody"

    I did not insult anyone. I was the one who repeatedly tried to end this, only to get lectured for it.

    "Look, I got the joke. But I also get why someone else would not. That is all."

    I know. That's what I said in my last ten comments. The reason I'm still responding to this is,because I got this desire for harmony in my life and the naive hope, we could all just give each other a heartfelt online hug.


  • Tatertot

    I hope she doesn't delete it, because this is an important discussion.

    I believe what you say Kommerzschlampe and I hope you understand the points I'm trying to make concerning context, clarity, and the fact that intention isn't magic. None of this is intended to be a personal attack on you, and I truly hope you know that.

  • Kommerzschlampe

    Nothing about this is important. We're just the usual bunch of comment-section-f*cks who can't let go of an argument that wasn't necessary in the first place, because if we acknowledged how meaningless this is, then ... well, WHAT did we just spent time and thoughts and energy on anyway? We're so not important, it's ridiculous.

    (See how I just proved my point by being all "meta" and sh*t right now? It's unbelieveable. I shouldn't do this more often.)

  • Tatertot

    Awwwwww...you're important to me :-)

  • Melissa D

    You were pretty clearly sarcastic to me. But then again I am sarcastic by nature.

  • Tatertot

    Yeah, if this were a post on regular celebrity idiocy, I would have assumed that, too, since sarcasm is my native tongue. But this kind of subject matter brings out the worst in people and brings the trolls out from under the bridge. So when dealing with this type of subject it really is better safe than sorry.

  • Kommerzschlampe

    I honestly thought, PAJIBA was a safe site from the get go. For spite and hatred I prefer the Hollywoodreporter.


  • Tatertot

    Safe from what and for whom? I'm not sure I'm understanding your reference. No, I'm sure I'm not understanding your reference.

  • Kommerzschlampe

    Okay, you got me. I AM BEING TROLLED! Took me some time to realize, but hey: better late than never. Keep up the great work.

  • Tatertot

    No. I'm not trolling you. I'm genuinely interested in your answer.

  • blackheart

    You are trolling and poking and trying to incite nonsense. So give it a rest. Sheesh!

  • Tatertot

    No. I'm trying to have an honest conversation about a highly charged subject, but apparently my inability to take a joke - like all humorless feminists everywhere - disqualifies me from the discussion.

    My bad!

  • Kommerzschlampe

    Thank you! Irony and the internet. What a disaster.

  • Tatertot

    And your point is? Being "born that way" is not a blanket excuse for bad or criminal behavior.

  • Kommerzschlampe

    Ummm, ... since when do I need to add smilies or explanations when being sarcastic on Pajiba?

  • Tatertot

    Until there's a sarcasm font you may want to try to give some indication that your comments shouldn't be taken at face value. "Ironic" quotations usually work as does the inclusion of an [/snark] tag.

    Given the hot-button nature of this subject matter, it's better to safe than thought a raging douche.

  • Kommerzschlampe

    You can't be serious.

  • Tatertot


    This is a text-based form of communication. I cannot see your body language or hear your tone of voice, so - yeah- I'm serious.

    This is deeply and emotionally charged subject matter. Casual sarcasm cannot be assumed, and post-graduate level sarcasm requires a deep commitment to carrying the comment to ridiculous lengths so that the facetiousness becomes obvious. If you're not willing to put that sort of effort into your snark, you may want to find some other way to make it obvious when dealing with this type of subject matter.

  • Kommerzschlampe

    Yes, I understand that. It's just completely beyond me, how anyone could take my comment seriously. I'm asking for the little mosters to weigh in, for crying out loud! :-)* And you do know that BORN THIS WAY is a song by Lady Gaga, right?

    Anyway. Let's stop doing this, okay? We agree on the actual topic, don't we? R. Kelly is a despicable human being and the fact that Gaga sang a song with THOSE lyrics with him and posed for THAT photo is just horribly stupid. And also: Irony and the internet are a match made in hell. Okay?


    *I added a smilie there
    **I added another smilie there

  • Tatertot

    So you "get" that this subject matter is loaded, but you're still shocked (shocked!) that someone took your comment seriously despite the sweet little pun you threw in?

    I believe you when you say you're not a douche and you think R. Kelly is a horrible human being, but that doesn't mean your initial comment was particularly well expressed given the context surrounding (and apparently I cannot express this enough) this particular subject matter.

  • JustOP

    Newsflash tatertot; no one gives a shit. Here's how this thing has played out:
    1. You were wrong about something
    2. You whined about being wrong
    3. You continued to whine and argued that 'wow this offensive and peoples FEELINGS could get hurt'

    Seriously. It was a sarcastic joke remark that worked as a pun because it related to a Lady Gaga song. Even IF Kommerzschlampe was being completely serious, do you think her* comment warranted the overly sensitive, overly sanctimonious and completely childish reaction you gave it?

  • Kommerzschlampe

    Actually it's "her comment" :-) Thanks anyway!

  • JustOP

    Oops! I'll edit it in for your sake!

  • Tatertot

    No. No, I don't.

    Let me expand.

    The subject of sexual predators and sexual assault is one fraught with emotion and a history silencing those who try to talk about. Because of this, the onus should be on commenters to show a bare modicum of consideration for potential survivors who might be reading. It's one of the reasons blogs that discuss this subject matter include "trigger warnings". The onus is not on me to not "be offended" or be "oversensitive", it's on other people to try to be more sensitive when dealing with this type of subject matter.

    Snark away in other threads - I'll happily read what you write and may even join in, but this is the kind of thread where people really should tread carefully.

    I'm very sorry you don't think that's obvious.

  • JustOP

    'I believe that debates should follow MY way of reasoning otherwise they are wrong and insensitive'

    The onus isn't on anyone to behave in any certain way. You can't enforce your way of thinking on popular forums because YOU believe it's the only way to converse/discuss/debate. Like it or not, people do not have to be tolerant of other peoples feelings, and nor do they have to censor or limit their speech in order to 'protect' them. Likewise, people do NOT have to cater their speech to people who have suffered traumatic events - no matter how unfortunate those may be.

    People can snark away in whichever thread they want, with or without your permission.

    I'm very sorry that you don't think this is obvious.

  • Tatertot

    You're right JustOP -- you don't have to show any consideration for other people at all, ever.

    I just think it speaks volumes of you as a person that you feel that way.

  • JustOP

    That's not what I said. Gain a basic level of reading comprehension and get back to me.

  • Tatertot

    "Likewise, people do NOT have to cater their speech to people who have
    suffered traumatic events - no matter how unfortunate those may be"

    I think I read you loud and clear. And - technically - you are right. No can make you do anything you don't want to do or feel is unnecessary.

    And I've never said that people have to conform to my way of reasoning, despite your use of quotation marks. I'd just like some people to take a moment to see how something said could be misinterpreted and whether or not a moment's consideration could have helped avoid that.

  • JustOP

    Yeah, but what you 'misinterpreted' was very obviously a joke - something you made a big deal out of. For no reason other than to preach BS about how people have to be totally sensitive guys when we talk about this topic because this is different for sure.

  • Tatertot

    Sigh. Because it was "obviously a joke" to you does not magically make it obvious to everyone. That's kind of the point of the whole discussion.

blog comments powered by Disqus