Pajiba

Woman*, dammit.

Maybe you should read a real feminist pop culture site instead of that shitty second wave crapfest being shilled by Jezebel. Oh wait. I forgot where I was for a second.

Faux outrage is the currency of the internet and because of the recession, we should spend lavishly.

Just be sure to save your real outrage for the truly important stuff.

Like the 14oz. "pint" that Haagen Daaz has been foisting off for the past year.

That video is delicious.

Excellently put! I like Jezebel, but sometimes it does seem a little over the top. Portrays a certain attitude that makes me want to yank their chain, say something provocative, and get myself banned, feminist woman disguised as a 10-year-old that I am. It's the pearl-clutching thing of the writer and some of the comments. Like how loopy they got yesterday when whatshisname from Deadspin was manning the site. Oh, is that sexist? Dammnit.

Sadly, for her, Olivia's charm/shtick seems to be limited to Attack of the Show playing off Kevin Pereira. Take her out of that context and she just falls flat. Girlfriend better have saved her pennies.

I'm all about Jessica Chobot now, that's a REAL geek goddess.

I miss the good old days where I would be forced to transfer to another section of a class because a feminist in this style would label me the Anti-Christ for liking Rosemary's Baby. Can we get back to valid critiques exaggerated to ridiculous levels and not target based on disgruntled ex-employees trying to assuage their wounds? We get it: all mostly-male television programs are evil and abuse women, for not casting the United Colors of Benetton news show means the men are just couth enough to not club the female employees in the head and drag them off to their caves for snu-snu.

See? I can grossly oversimplify an argument, too, to piss people off.

And where is our comment diversion to pick a female correspondent for the Daily Show??

i've ceased visiting jezebel. a former daily visitor, i found the commentary shallow and not worth reading. the posts are more and more agenda driven and less and less feminist. faux outrage is an apt description for blogs like these lacking in insight, which becomes damaging for feminism.

now the commentary on pajiba... ! equal parts insightful and non.

Jezebel commentators remind me of the militant lactivists that haunt parenting blogs and accost innocent parents in the street. It seems to be a part of American culture that no matter how much we evolve as a species, there is always going to be a bunch of bitchy women who take it upon themselves to speak for the whole of femininity on how we should feel about parenting, working, love sex or marriage. Now-a-days they cloak themselves in righteous indignation and demand that women who don't breastfeed their babies, get fake boobs or chose abstinence over any other form of birth control feel shame and humiliation for their choices.

Still, that website can post a review of Sex and the City without half of the commentators making horse jokes about Sarah Jessica Parker which is more than I can say for this website.

Seriously people. You aren't funny, you are just repeating what everyone else has already said about her and it is dull and tiresome.

I like Jezebel a lot, but the Olivia Munn hate over there has been really disappointing to me. That aside, I thought they had a reasonable point about the lack of female representation and, sadly, the TDS' women's response kind of missed the mark. Jezebel wasn't criticizing the number of women who work on the show, but the number of female writers and on-air personalities (and female guests). Moreover, Irin says that she contacted the show for comment before running the piece, so it's a little silly to criticize her for quoting ex-employees instead of current ones - the current ones didn't want to talk.

TDS is one of the better things on television right now, and most Jezebel commenters expressed love for it. That's why people are disappointed when they realize how few women they see on screen. It doesn't mean that Jon Stewart is a sexist jerk - it probably has a lot to do with fewer women going into comedy, which in turn has a lot to do with how few visible female comedians there are now. But it would have been nice if TDS had been a little less defensive and a little more open to the conversation.

Irin Camron is the scholar who posited that ogling world cup players was empowering. Her journalism and op-ed skills qualify her to suck upon it.

The Jezebel, which I used to enjoy so, has sidelined Slut Machine (who stopped being funny when she got married) and Moe Tcakick is missed. Is that Racialicious moron still posting on Jezebel?

The funniest thing about Camron's post was that she was outraged (outraged!) that Stewart didn't respond to her directly about her completely unfounded accusations of sexism on a show she had no connection whatsoever to. That'd be like Pajiba cursing Michael Bay for refusing to get back to them on the size of his man-parts.

That's one of the things I hate most about Jezebel- the sense of entitlement and inability to view their position as a blog/commenting community with any kind of perspective. Take a look at the comments on the Deadspin editor's guest posts for plentiful examples, in addition to their joyful application of the banhammer should any dissent be voiced.

Speaking of, I wonder how long it takes the commentariat to find their way over here? Not long, I suspect.

I'm partial to Feministing myself. Jezebel has always seemed a little too in it for the entertainment factor

Years ago, I was going to post a comment on a Jezebel article. Then I realized that you have to AUDITION TO COMMENT.

Seriously. Any site that far up their own ass isn't worth a moment of my time. The years since have only validated that decision.

The bigger question I have, though: no one does sincerity anymore? Because being ironic and clever and sarcastic has its moments, to be sure. It can be hilarious when used correctly and in moderation.

But I'm such a fan of sincerity! When do you think it'll come back? Maybe when lady pubes do. Sigh.

It is impossible not to have some kind of bias for or against a person based on some group they belong to. There are three kinds of people who deal with this in three different ways: awesome people who acknowledge the bias and try to mitigate it; asshole people who acknowledge the bias and buy into it; and useless people who either don't acknowledge or don't recognize their bias.

I feel like the people behind the Daily Show fit into the third category. That wouldn't be a big deal if they didn't pretend the show was progressive.

It's like when Colbert says he doesn't see race and doesn't see sex. Except the Daily Show staff don't realize they are caricatures.

*facepalm*

God, everytime someone does something like this, I feel a bit like I should be writing a letter of apology to the suffragettes or the women of the 70s or something, "Ladies, I'm sorry it all went so wrong".

Honestly, if feminism now means you can be either of two extremes, a rabid knee-jerki reactionist or a gasping, greased-up pair of tits because WOMEN LIKE SEX TOO GEDDIT, please, don't do me any favours.

Don't for one second think I don't appreciate that I now am relatively free from workplace sexual abuse, that I am free to choose to abort or divorce, that I can go to school and that I can walk down the street alone, that there are many, many wonderful things I am free to do and from. So I'm in awe of everything that was sacrificed to get me to that point. And as for the sexual liberation stuff: I bloody hate sex. I don't think it's because I'm a woman and it's a cliche I'm stubbonly refusing to prove, I think as a over-analytical human being, I find it disgusting, it doesn't feel good, and desperation is unattractive so seeing someone panting for it is gross. So I don't fit into either category.

What I am saying is: This is a slip-up Jezebel. A balls-sized Bill O'Reilly-level fuck-up. Jezebel froths at the mouth how being a woman is everything, is every aspect of our lives.

Sorry, being a woman does not encompass me. It is last on the list of what I am. I am a writer, a hockey fan, a reader, an analyst, and I don't sit at everything I take in wondering how it's offended me as a woman before wondering how it's offended me as any of those things I've listed before it.

Carmon, Jon Stewart is probably one of the most sympathetic male mouthpieces to what you are even working towards. Remove gender here. You may be a feminist, but you are first and foremost a knee-jerk reactionist twat of a human being.

@ mightygodking

You are missing the point! They could have jumped to the defense of their employer and also acknowledged that there is a pernicious numbers disaparity in the number of female correspondents and writers of The Daily Show which was the entire point of the original Jezebel article .

And to this point: "It seems kind of silly to scream "sexism" because someone who worked in another semi-comedic gig successfully got a job." the sexism comes in when you don't hire a new full-time female correspondent for seven years (that's how long it's been since TDS had a new female correspondent! Seven! Years!) and then, when you do hire a new woman, after an "exhaustive interview process" immediately go for the regulation hottie. Now, Olivia Munn may work out to be awesome, and if she does, great. Saying that new correspondents often don't work out doesn't fucking count when a new woman is only brought in after seven years. I refuse to believe that there were no funny, capable, hot women around in comedy in the SEVEN YEARS since the last lady to join TDS staff.

or maybe women just aren't funny.

or maybe women just aren't funny.

or maybe women just aren't funny.

Nobody wins, Odnon. Nobody.

Seventeen of 100 currently sitting Senators are female. Only one woman has ever commanded a space shuttle. Women hold less than sixteen percent of the board seats on Fortune 500 companies.

Forget all that, I want to know why Kristen Schaal isn't getting more segments!

I never say things like this, but:

BRANDED FOR THE WIN.

While I thought the Jezebel article was over the top, I was also somewhat disappointed with TDS's reaction (and this is coming from a long-time fan). I don't necessarily think that the lack of well-known women faces in comedy is a problem specific to TDS, and suspect that the huge lag in hiring a new full-time female correspondent was due to a larger problem. It would have been a great time for them to engage in a semi-serious discussion about the perception of women in society and how that connects to women in comedy. Unfortunately, it came across as more of a knee-jerk reaction.

Nobody wins, I strongly recommend Cougara.c o m to you where I just found my wealthy boyfriend! You know it is a great place to meet wealthy men and beautiful women. Rihanna is looking for her true love on that site now!

the sexism comes in when you don't hire a new full-time female correspondent for seven years (that's how long it's been since TDS had a new female correspondent! Seven! Years!)

Except for Kristen Schaal, who was hired on to be a full-time correspondent in 2008 but decided she preferred only being a part-time correspondent and concentrating more on writing for the show.

And I can say, straight-up, that part of the reason new female correspondents have a harder time auditioning is simple: Samantha Bee is easily the best female correspondent they've ever had, and competes with Colbert and Carell for being the best overall, and any new female comic auditioning for a Daily Show slot has to be either as good as Bee (which is nearly impossible) or distinctly good in a completely different way (which is very difficult), because Bee's job is simply to provide the facetious "woman's perspective" as often as not, because the Daily Show parodies TV news and that's what the news does. When they don't want to use Bee, they've got Kristen Schaal to be "the woman of news," and Schaal can kill at that. This means that any female auditioner has to come up with a new shtick to distinguish herself from the existing female performers. (Guys have to do it too, and not many of them can manage it. John Oliver, Wyatt Cenac and Aasif Mandvi are the most stable crew the show's had in a while.)

and then, when you do hire a new woman, after an "exhaustive interview process" immediately go for the regulation hottie.

It's always pleasant when you assume the worst with absolutely no evidence in question. Maybe Olivia Munn fucking killed her audition. You don't know one way or the other, but instead you're just choosing to assume the worst when the entire female staff of the Daily Show (a list, incidentally, that includes at least four people who would have had to approved Munn's hire, but I guess they were hynotized by her magic titties or something) are saying, straight-up, that you're full of crap.

I'm so glad I read these comments (enjoy your farthings Dustin!) I too read Jezebel regularly in the past, but slowly developed a sense of unease over the site. There's a fair amount of what I see as hypocrisy on the site - like the strange anti "body snarking" stance, which is great in theory, but seems to only be practiced when the writers and cliquey commenters feel like it. Also, as someone has previously pointed out, the reasoning behind the "World Cup Thighlights" was just stupid. It's a real shame, because the site is so popular and the concept is great.

You all know my faux outrage is just as often as not, real outrage.

Faurage?
Forage?
mmmmmm nuts and berries....

My point is...Wait, what?

No, sorry, The Daily Show isn't sexist.
It's easy to throw words like that around these days, to accuse some one or some group of something because they happen to hire or fire certain people.

I could very easily call Sam Raimi a racist because I've never seen a black person in any of his movies(I'm not saying they're not there, I'm saying I dont remember, at this moment, when I'm high on coffee and pain killers, remember seeing any...maybe they were hiding)or because the villain in Drag me To Hell was a Gypsy.
But that would be wrong and stupid because 1) Gypsy's are only named as the cursers once, Mrs Ganesh is just Eastern European, not specifically a Roma or traveller, and two of the films heroes are Latino and Indian respectively. 2) Raimi has been in the business for years and if he was racist I'm pretty sure people would know by now, and 3) The old lady is not only never specifically named as a Gypsy but she's supposed to represent the oppressed masses being hung out to dry by heartless banks while Christine is the uptight consumer obsessed with success.

But that isn't my point, my point is, if you look at ANYTHING from the the right angle you could label it as offensive, racist, bigoted, homophobic etc etc.

You could call the British comedy series Green Wing homophobic because one character makes gay jokes at anothers expense -but those same two characters end up expressing some sincere feelings for one another by the end of the series and it becomes apparent the character taking the jokes is almost definately a closeted homosexual or bisexual any way.

You could call it racist because only upper middle class white people are doctors while the only black dude on the show is the IT technician.
But the black character is also the most handsome and universally adored character, the only SANE character, the only truly kind, unselfish character and ends up having a lovely, affectionate and loving affair with the frumpiest female cast member because he just adores her(Lyndon and Harriet 4evaaaa)
You could say it's ageist because the oldest female character is a harpy of a woman who's shrill,cruel, slutty and convinced she's sexier than she is despite being rejected by almost every man she comes near.
Except she's actually a very sad brilliant character with real concerns about her own ageing and is in fact entirely adored by the same male character who might be the closeted gay dude(look, you need to watch the show, it's complicated, okay!?)

What I'm saying is....you can argue someone/thing is bigoted if you look at it hard enough from the right(and most convenient to your cause) vantage point, but if you look at it just as hard from two inches this way or that, you can argue it's actually very progressive or has a sincerity hidden beneath the apparent controversy.

Lets just all agree Mel Gibson is a racist, sexist, homophobic cunt who needs to just hurry up and die. Kay?

Mayhap Ms. Munn was simply the least bad of the women who tried out for the part? OR, maybe Mr. Stewart doesn't have the final call on who is allowed on the show since it's run by producers and network execs? OR maybe, just maybe, like a few have already pointed out before, there is a severe lack of talented female comedians? I'm not saying women can't be funny, but I simply don't see that many good female comedians.

And it sucks that you can't call someone out for failing to acknowledge their bias without having them freak the fuck out and accuse you of calling them a sexist prick. Stewart is pretty much being a whiny little bitch with this one.

So let me get this straight: some random blogger takes the fact that he doesn't have a lot of VISIBLE female co-workers to insinuate that the show and he himself has (at best) a bias against women, a show with his name on it and that he is the public face of, and he SHOULDN'T take that personally?

And yes, visibility is the real problem. As the open letter states, there are plenty of women involved with the show, they just aren't paraded out in front of everyone to show how progressive and equal they are.

And what about choice? Could it be that some of these funny and talented women CHOOSE not to be on the air? Last I checked, Samantha Bee does have a family, and nowadays her and Jason Jones mostly switch places or do an occasional dual piece. And as someone stated, Schaal has her own reasons for not being a full correspondent. Maybe these hypothetical comedy superwomen are already on other stuff. Of choose to stay independent and do their own material. Did Jezebel actually try to find out how many women APPLY for the show in a talent capacity vs. a more background role?

It could never be simply a demographic thing. That the number of women on the show sadly reflects the current state of female employment in a lot of places, regardless of their best efforts. It could never be that there are women making the choice to not work there, for a multitude of reasons as varied as the women involved. It simply has to be some sort of sexism, at best unintentional, at worst diabolically overt.

I would say that the fact that the women of The Daily Show felt so incensed about being TOLD they were unimportant (simply because they weren't where this blogger FELT they should be) that they responded in such a way should be a testament to how respected and important they are on the show.

Oh by the way, this:

Hiring Munn seems to indicate that the Daily Show is trying to appeal to a certain audience. That audience is primarily dudes. As a non-dude, I find this problematic because I am otherwise a Daily Show fan and I would enjoy the show more if it attempted to appeal to my demographic more.

directly contradicts this:

I don't have a problem with them hiring Munn.

I find it funny that, for all the sexism talk, the most consistent thing that comes to people's minds (when it comes to Munn being on the show) is "well, obviously the MEN thought she was hot, so OF COURSE they hired her for that sole reason". Nice to know Stewart and all the other men involved could be snowed by an attractive woman, throwing out any sense of intelligence.

Again, how is he not to take that sort of thing personally?

I've been over at Jezebel a lot recently, but it's pieces like this that keep Pajiba #1 in my heart.

Like the 14oz. "pint" that Haagen Daaz has been foisting off for the past year.

Posted by: clocker at July 6, 2010 8:43 PM
---
Welcome to my world. I drink beer.

*sincere outrage here, snuggie*

What I think is ridiculous about all of this, is that the original Jezebel article was about a lack of female writers. People in the creative side of things. Although the open letter was wonderful and should end all this silliness, they still failed to address why there are so few women on the writing side of the show. I know many Jezebel readers didn't feel satisfied by this letter, and that just makes the site seem crazier to other blogs that are commenting on it. I don't think enough people are actually reading the original article and just trusting other blogs to sum it up for them. The original jezebel article was about a lack of female writers and neither the open letter or anything else written yet addresses that side of it appropriately.
That said, this issue could/will/should end now.

You mean that's a GUY on the one dollar bill? With a wig and a ruffled collar? So the country was founded by ugly trannies? Perhaps the currency should be the Rupaul? Of course 10 Rupauls would be a Swazye.

Yeah, I pretty clearly implied that she was hired for her looks, but this is me backtracking.

Eee I can't wait til some Jezzies read our comments and rail against us HATING WOMENS and just not getting it. I'm gonna go generate more page views on the good stuff, like the ones with photos of shirtless men.

What was the review of Sex and the City 2 that talked about the not pretty enough liberal female backlash? Yeah, there you go.

Wah! I'm entitled to have more women on the Daily Show! Someone listen to me stomp my feet! I can't believe they even responded to those fuckwits.

Having said all that, I don't know what The Daily Show's hiring practices are. And I don't believe they're obligated to hire a percentage of people just because those people have vaginas instead of penises. I'd rather see someone funny than someone with the same parts as me. Maybe there aren't as many women who are funny in this comedy niche as there are men.

I think the complaint that the Daily Show should have more women correspondents and guests is a valid criticism. I also think the complaint that Lewis Black is not funny and should be on the show less is a valid criticism. Why can a person not express the fact that they would enjoy the show more if there were more women on it without creating a huge clusterfuck?

And I'm pretty sure that no one has ever been told to STFU and just be grateful that there exists a moderately liberal comedy news show when they complain that the Daily Show would be better without Lewis Black.

What happen to the days of hiring the most qualified person for the job?

Jezebel is basically a high school clique. If you don't agree with them, you are against them. The original piece was poorly researched and designed to inflame. The footage of Munn they used to illustrate their point was the most unflattering footage possible and designed to play up the point that she got the Daily Show gig based on sex appeal alone.

ERM, I'm not sure I understand your point that your criticism about Lewis Black is the same as the current topic. However, I happen to enjoy Lewis' appearances and they are fairly infrequent. He appears approximately once a month, if that often.

The point is that the Daily Show is a specific type of comedy and it is possible that there is a limited pool of applicants who happen to possess that specific brand of comedy. Gender, race, sexual preference do not matter when it comes to picking the best talent for a show. Trying to bring that in as a valid criticism with minimal evidence is a disservice to the show and the staff who work very hard to bring the funny to situations that often are anything but.

It seems to be a part of American culture that no matter how much we evolve as a species, there is always going to be a bunch of bitchy women who take it upon themselves to speak for the whole of femininity on how we should feel about parenting, working, love sex or marriage.

Yes! Does anyone remember their high school history classes and learning about the Christian Women's Temperance Movement? AKA, the reason behind the failed experiment of prohibition? God what a bunch of bored busybodies! I still get really angry thinking about them. That may or may not making me a raging nerd.

Jezebel has always struck me as a site made by and for "feminists" who equate empowerment with being able to get as fucked up as men and do the same stupid shit they do. Yeah, way to achieve equality! These types do way more harm than good.

I work in the healthcare field, and it is hard not to notice that 95% of the physicians are men and 95% of the administrative staff and medical and physician assistants are women. I see similarities in the breakdown of the Daily Show's staff. Would I call my work place sexist? Hell no! We may not make the big bucks like the docs but we run the show. There are systemic inequity issues that can't be denied, but it doesn't mean that those of us working within such systems aren't valued in our own right, or perform just as important of functions.

Sorry if I repeated already stated arguments. I have important, not-physician work to perform for my department and I didn't have time to read all of the comments first.

Why can a person not express the fact that they would enjoy the show more if there were more women on it without creating a huge clusterfuck?

There is a difference between saying "I would like to see more women on The Daily Show" (what you seem to be saying) and "The Daily Show is sexist because they don't have more women on the show" (what the Jezebel article is saying).

The former is, as you said, a statement of preference, one which nobody here is arguing against. Also, it allows one to accept that sometimes even the best can't do everything or include everyone, though it would be nice.

The latter is an inflammatory statement that, for a lot of folks, certainly demands more effective evidence than was presented. It reduces a complex issue to a attention grabbing headline.

It was an analogy. I was comparing two unalike things.

Someone on the slate comment section said that attacking feminists is just as easy as trashing blacks just accused me of disagreeing with her to suck up to white people.

I'm not even kidding.

First she said: "Anti-feminist men and women have been attacking feminism as nothing but "petty jealousy" spouted by ugly, lonely women since the 1800s. This article is just a trite re-hashing of centuries old anti-feminist propaganda. (I'm a black woman. The fastest way for me to get white people to like me is to trash other black people. I don't, but it's an easy and effective - albeit pathetic - trick. It's the trick Gould is playing on readers. Don't fall for it)"

and when I disagreed pointing out that I've never trashed blacks in an effort to get white people to like me, she said:

"Extra points to the other black commenter (stop the madness) for proving my point by sucking up to white people on this thread by saying that she/he would NEVER, EVER trash blacks to incur their favor. Do you see how cleverly she/he tried to discredit ME to make the white commenters like him/her? Thank you for proving my exact point so deliciously. Bravo, dear. "

jaw meet floor.

these asshats are out of their mind.

oh and i tried to post a dissenting view on Tiger Beatdown and guess what? my comment is in moderation. (and i didn't even use any foul language.)

Still, that website can post a review of Sex and the City without half of the commentators making horse jokes about Sarah Jessica Parker which is more than I can say for this website.

Seriously people. You aren't funny, you are just repeating what everyone else has already said about her and it is dull and tiresome.

Posted by: Jennifer at July 6, 2010 9:35 PM

So what you're saying is...we need to stop beating a dead horse?

I'm always baffled when people (particularly self-proclaimed feminists) lament the idea that a woman could get a boost in life because of her looks. People become successful in a variety of ways, and one of those is by using the natural gifts with which one was blessed. So yeah, Olivia Munn is attractive. You'd rather she scrub herself with mud and wear sackcloth before auditions, just so her photogenic looks don't apply? It's fucking TV! Of course they want attractive people! You think the fact that Anderson Cooper and Brian Williams (both excellent newsmen) are handsome didn't help them get high level anchor jobs? Katie Couric is pretty damn cute herself; I guess her good looks outweigh her talent as an anchor, right?

The Jezebel article used the Daily Show as its supposed target, but they were really aiming at Munn. It's apparently beyond them that a woman who is attractive and comes with a built-in fanbase (a fanbase which also happens to be the target demo of TDS) could also be talented. Clearly she was only hired for her looks, an idea they support when they say things like Munn is "someone better known for suggestively putting things in her mouth on a video game show and being on the covers of Playboy and Maxim than for her comedic chops." A pro-feminist website said that about a successful woman. They lament the treatment of women in popular culture and media, and then this is how they describe someone who's worked and used her God given gifts to get where she is. Methinks there's a disconnect somewhere in there. I wonder if the article would have been written if a less conventionally attractive comedian were hired instead of Munn? And maybe that's what she's more known for by Jezebel, but what about the people who are her existing fanbase (which includes women, BTW)?

I'm not saying this excuses a lack of equity in TDS staffing. And I get that some people don't find Munn funny; different strokes and all that. But at some point talent has to be considered. If you make the claim that there HAD to have been more talented comediennes who auditioned for the spot, then I would like to know how you got your hands on the audition tapes. Because the only way to know for sure that Munn was hired over more talented women simply because of how she looks is if you've seen them. And I'm pretty sure you haven't.

And for what it's worth, I saw Munn's second piece (about the Russian spy ring arrests), and she did pretty well. She's still a little stiff, but that's to be expected. And hey, she made Jon Stewart laugh during the piece, so she can't be all bad.

Here's my opinion. The View can have every damn person working for them be a woman. I simply don't care. They market towards an audience and that audience is satisfied. If the Daily show had ONLY male employees and they still make me laugh. I still dont care! Because I'm not watching them because of how many black men or women or eunichs or homosexuals they employ. I watch them cause they fucking entertain me! If you want women to entertain you so much. GO OUT AND SPEND FIFTEEN YEARS MAKING AN EMMY WINNING SHOW. Until then you don't really have any business telling these people how to run their company. The make good entertainment and thats their only real responsibility as far as I'm concerned. I'm pretty sure that the execs at the daily show's number one priority is to make us laugh. When a women walks in the door and demonstrates the ability to do that. They hire her. They're doing their jobs. For that I salute them.

@Stopthemadness

"just accused me of disagreeing with her to suck up to white people."

That is really funny. People are ridiculous. I'm going to stay far away from that Slate article.

Oh, and I think Tigerbeatdown makes every comment automatically go into moderation.

Holy SHIT this thread is long.
Also, did someone call out Stopthemadness?!

I'll be over here, in my bunker, waving my stopthemadness flag

Ugh, Jezebel annoys the hell out of me. Every time I've tried to give them another shot, I read another article with spurious, inflammatory arguments full of strawmen. I find them exhausting. Feministing is a MUCH better source for feminist perspective news.

I love Craig Kilborn, but according to TDS creator Lizz Winstead, he was the biggest sexist prick on the block. It's been a MUCH more femnist-friendly show content-wise since Jon Stewart took over - and I've been watching since the first Kilborn episode.

Feministing makes my brain bleed. I'm pretty sure the average age of their commenters is 14. I prefer feministe (http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2010/07/07/when-feminists-attack-other-feminists-for-page-views/)

ERM - I'm sorry to have to contradict you, but you (and others) keep saying it's Stewart's show. It's not. It's Comedy Central's show featuring Jon Stewart, and he wasn't even the original host. For those who can remember, Craig Kilborn was the original host for a couple of years. The point I am trying to make here is that many people, including the collective hive of gnats over at Jezebel, are attacking individuals without any basis for their claims when, if there was a problem, which there isn't, should be taken up with the execs and producers.

::waves jellybean flag::

ERM, it was pretty absurd over there! I have to disagree with your sexist prick point, though. (HA! I slay me.)

We have to keep in mind that Jon Stewart is the one who told an entire network to go fuck themselves. In response to an article that was poorly researched and implied that he was a tyrant, I'd have to say the writers weren't off the reservation when they used the phrase "sexist prick." I don't know if you watched the clip, but it literally was a throwaway line in his intro "rant." It's not like he did a whole segment talking about "Jezebel thinks I'm a sexist prick." For what it's worth!

"when, if there was a problem, which there isn't, should be taken up with the execs and producers."

Another of my issues with some of the criticism. Something like 11 women on TDS's list are either producers or assistant producers. And yet the backlash implies (and sometimes outright states) that TDS primarily hires women to be makeup artists or teleprompter operators (nicely undermining their work, as well, btw). Um, that's a decent (not amazing, but decent) number of female producers. Producers have, you know, a little bit of influence. Just saying.
/beatingdeadhorse.

http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2010/07/07/when-feminists-attack-other-feminists-for-page-views/

I appreciate this piece.

All I want at this point is for TDS people to not say a word in response to these fuckwits. They're loving the attention that something as big as that show is is paying attention to them. More page views, yay! Let's beat up at the imaginary evil that is one of the most well loved shows on TV right now, because you KNOW the defenders will come out in droves to look at our pages.

Please, TDS. Don't dignify them with a second response. They don't deserve it.

stopthemadness Excuse my ignorance, but is that your own blog you linked to?

Because that was one awesome flood of tasty, tasty vitriol. I may have to lick your brain now.