S16.E05: Anna Deavere Smith, Vicente Fox, Fran Lebowitz, and Salman Rushdie

[formerlyfreedom]

Quote

Playwright and actress Anna Deavere Smith is the top-of-show interview guest. Vicente Fox, former president of Mexico, is the mid-show interview guest. The roundtable guests are author Fran Lebowitz and author Salman Rushdie.

[GoldenGirl90]

Bill has been taking an awful lot of stabs at the #MeToo movement in the past several weeks, especially during New Rules. 

Even in his opening with his guest Anna Deavere Smith, he joked, “we can still greet each other with a kiss on the cheek?” 

On a separate note, Anna is incredible and brought up some great points about the disparities between black/brown/Native American/poor white children are disciplined more harshly than their middle and upper class cohorts. 

Edited February 17, 2018 by Alexis2291

[Caseysgirl]

I agree with Salman Rusdie that it's time for the baby boomers ( and I am one) to step aside and let the younger generation have their chance.    I'm talking about about all of them including Bernie!!!  Start mentoring and pushing the next generation into the forefront; we've messed up enough, let's let someone else have a chance.

[ruby24]

1 hour ago, Alexis2291 said:

Bill has been taking an awful lot of stabs at the #MeToo movement in the past several weeks, especially during New Rules. 

 

This is why I can't watch the show anymore. I knew he was going to do this, I KNEW it. Ever since this started happening, I knew there would come a point where he would take the side of the men being accused. And then I had to ask myself how I could still watch if I already knew he was the kind of guy who was going to do exactly what he did. 

So I quit.

[revbfc]

Possibly the most boring episode of Real Time in a while.

[babs1226]

I'm glad that Salman Rushdie brought up the grass roots movement that is sweeping the country and the types of candidates that are running and winning.  For someone who hosts a political show, Maher at times seems woefully uninformed.

[iMonrey]

I usually find Fran Lebowitz useless as a panelist. She rarely contributes anything but caustic quips. At least she had a little bit more of substance to offer this time around, but not much. Still not a strong enough panelist to merit only having 2 of them. 

[wknt3]

5 hours ago, babs1226 said:

For someone who hosts a political show, Maher at times seems woefully uninformed.

"At times"? You are much more generous than I am! And it seems to have gotten worse over time. I'm not sure if he's gotten lazier, or if the proliferation of shows covering the territory he once has pretty much to himself on television makes it more obvious.

[charmed1]

Though I find Fox’s Trump trolling amusing, I’ve never gotten on his bandwagon for his “Mexicans do the jobs not even the blacks want,” statement. Bye. 

I do want to know what Fran got expelled for though. And uhhh...no Bill. The asshole who murdered 17 people in Florida is not representative of the prison to pipeline tragedy. Police were called dozens of times, and that piece of shit has no criminal record. He absolutely should’ve been expelled from school.

Edited February 17, 2018 by charmed1

[candall]

Second week in a row I was pleading at my television to transport the interview guest over to the panel.

[sistermagpie]

34 minutes ago, charmed1 said:

I do want to know what Fran got expelled for though. And uhhh...no Bill. The asshole who murdered 17 people in Florida is not representative of the prison to pipeline tragedy. Police were called dozens of times, and that piece of shit has no criminal record. He absolutely should’ve been expelled from school.

OMG, yes. What on earth was that? That kid was a prime example of how prison pipeline is about non-white youths. And what was up with assuming he was overmedicated and this was somehow a problem? I don't know what his treatment background was, but it was bizarre that it seemed like Bill was trying to make him the victim there.

Totally agree about Baby Boomers needing to step aside--and not because it's anything specifically bad about Baby Boomers. It's absurd that we're living in a time of this kind of upheaval and anyone is still suggesting that the very oldest people should be the candidates.

And yeah, Bill is just tone deaf to the Me Too stuff in exactly the way you'd expect. As far as he's concerned this is all about college students not always laughing at his jokes because they're too sensitive.

[ganesh]

This seemed fairly tepid to me and Rushdie is usually a great guest. 

Again though, yes, the butthurt white people voted 40% for Trump. But, no, it doesn't mean we have to listen to them. Get the 65 million people who didn't vote to get out and vote and that relative % goes way down. We said it here last week. They aren't interested. 

Bill was right about the democrats not controlling the political dialogue, but they skipped over it. 

I did like how Bill complained about the use of "law abiding". It drives me up the wall. 

[DrScottie]

I'm a staunch supporter of women's rights, glad repulsive behavior is being exposed, and I'm not a Russian bot, but I honestly don't understand all the backlash on how Bill is discussing #MeToo. As a single guy, I don't even know if what I perceive as something innocuous like holding a door open could be deemed sexist or harassment now. That's just my take on it, but I would just like to know why his statements on #MeToo are causing offense. I'm thinking I'm tone deaf on this as well and I don't want to be. I know it sounds like a Fox News hit piece to say that I'm just asking questions, but in this case, I truly am. I'd like to leave my bubble and get some insights into what I'm missing. Thanks! 

[sistermagpie]

21 minutes ago, DrScottie said:

I'm a staunch supporter of women's rights, glad repulsive behavior is being exposed, and I'm not a Russian bot, but I honestly don't understand all the backlash on how Bill is discussing #MeToo. As a single guy, I don't even know if what I perceive as something innocuous like holding a door open could be deemed sexist or harassment now. That's just my take on it, but I would just like to know why his statements on #MeToo are causing offense. I'm thinking I'm tone deaf on this as well and I don't want to be. I know it sounds like a Fox News hit piece to say that I'm just asking questions, but in this case, I truly am. I'd like to leave my bubble and get some insights into what I'm missing. Thanks! 

They’re offensive and belittling because they’re directly supporting the backlash/opposition to the Me Too movement, which is all about creating a false narrative that Me Too is about attacking men for opening a door for someone. Iow, it’s painting Me Too like it’s hysterical and petty and treats rape the same as a butt pat and men are victims of attacking women and male lives are being destroyed even while Harvey Weinstein is recuperating at a spa. It’s already “gone too far” and needs to turn its attention back to protecting men from accusations. Bill’s already the victim.

[attica]

Points to ADS for pointing out that the point (or one of the points, anyhow) of colorblind casting is to let underrepresented races and genders do work, not giving all the work to white guys. Sigh.  Equality sure feels like oppression to the privileged. 

[sistermagpie]

21 minutes ago, attica said:

Points to ADS for pointing out that the point (or one of the points, anyhow) of colorblind casting is to let underrepresented races and genders do work, not giving all the work to white guys. Sigh.  Equality sure feels like oppression to the privileged. 

Oh god, I forgot that. That was so ridiculous! Not to mention, it wasn’t even correct at least at the idea that people won’t let men play women. The show Baskets currently has Louie Anderson playing a woman and as far as I know he’s getting good reviews. (I watch the show and think he’s doing a great job.) The point is that white, cis, able-bodied people have a long, still-continuing history of being first part for parts. It’s just so weird to speak as if you don’t know that and are just noticing the bias in the other direction.

[DrScottie]

46 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

They’re offensive and belittling because they’re directly supporting the backlash/opposition to the Me Too movement, which is all about creating a false narrative that Me Too is about attacking men for opening a door for someone. Iow, it’s painting Me Too like it’s hysterical and petty and treats rape the same as a butt pat and men are victims of attacking women and male lives are being destroyed even while Harvey Weinstein is recuperating at a spa. It’s already “gone too far” and needs to turn its attention back to protecting men from accusations. Bill’s already the victim.

Thank you very much for that clarification. I'll be more wise to it when he undoubtedly returns to this issue two weeks from now. 

[Victor the Crab]

Sigh. Why the fuck does Bill continue to make an ass of himself over women's issues? He has no ground for which to stand on and he comes off as a whinny little suck every time he brings it up. He sure sounds like he has something in his past to hide.

[iMonrey]

Quote

I'm a staunch supporter of women's rights, glad repulsive behavior is being exposed, and I'm not a Russian bot, but I honestly don't understand all the backlash on how Bill is discussing #MeToo. As a single guy, I don't even know if what I perceive as something innocuous like holding a door open could be deemed sexist or harassment now. That's just my take on it, but I would just like to know why his statements on #MeToo are causing offense. I'm thinking I'm tone deaf on this as well and I don't want to be. I know it sounds like a Fox News hit piece to say that I'm just asking questions, but in this case, I truly am.

I think it's very specific to Bill Maher. I understand what you're saying and in some cases I can see where men would become paranoid about the least little interaction with women. But for Bill it comes off as defensive - like he knows there are women out there he's harassed and he knows any one of them could come forward and go public so he's trying to proactively discredit them. I think in general this is a topic men should steer clear of complaining about, but Bill in particular is sort of treading dangerous waters. We know the type of dude-bros he hangs with. I'm just waiting for that upcoming headline.

[The Mighty Peanut]

22 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

 

And yeah, Bill is just tone deaf to the Me Too stuff in exactly the way you'd expect. As far as he's concerned this is all about college students not always laughing at his jokes because they're too sensitive.

Yes! When Me Too started getting huge I thought to myself, “Bill is going to make this about college students not laughing at his jokes.” I do agree with him that Aziz Ansari has no place being on the same list as Weinstein, but I feel he’s desperately trying to steer someone else into saying what he wants: aren’t women overreacting just a little bit? 

[navelgazer]

I kind of thought Bill had a point with his criticism of what women like and pay money for in popular culture.  It makes me very sad/sick that the latest movie in the 50 Shades trilogy is making mountains of money at the box office.  And in the Twilight Saga Edward wasn't a sadist.  He was a professional stalker and yet every girl's dream guy.  He doesn't want sex, which every real-life straight guy wants from girls all the time. 

I was once an Andrea Dworkin/Catharine MacKinnon radical feminist man-hater.  I was really angry for a really long time.  It's not that I'm trans.  I do like being a girl.  But I hated how I was sexualized when I was a 12-year-old kid and it took me a really long time to work through all of that.  What I'm trying to get to is there's an angle Bill hasn't brought up yet and it's a doozy.  If #metoo really wants to stop the harassment and sabotage the patriarchy, women need to throw out their hair dyes and their eye shadow and stop going to see the plastic surgeon for their BOTOX injections and all of the things women do not just to feel good about themselves, but to make themselves into the sex objects they're expected to be. 

[attica]

2 hours ago, The Mighty Peanut said:

I do agree with him that Aziz Ansari has no place being on the same list as Weinstein

But of course nobody is saying they're the same. We women all know far too freaking well how long and varied the continuum of sexual misconduct is. We are forced, on a daily basis, to parse the fine gradations of bullshit that get thrown our way. Otherwise, we'd never leave the house. So the 'don't lump them all together!!!!' freakout is a strawman.

[GoldenGirl90]

10 hours ago, iMonrey said:

But for Bill it comes off as defensive - like he knows there are women out there he's harassed and he knows any one of them could come forward and go public so he's trying to proactively discredit them.

Bingo. And for the record, I’m a woman and I hate “Love, Actually” and the entire fifty shades series. Not because I’m a prude but... idk. I just hate it, lol. Now I may be biased - I hate erotic novels/movies as much as I hate romantic comedy novels/movies - but that doesn’t change the fact that Bill has constantly included the #MeToo movements in his monologues or New Rule segments. It always struck me as if he has some skeletons in his closet. I could be wrong.

Edited February 19, 2018 by Alexis2291

[Fable]

I didn’t mind New Rules.  Bill’s delivery can be obnoxious and off putting, and perhaps this would have been better received from someone else, but he did make some good points.  While not as often as women, men can be affected too by unwanted advances or outright sexual assault, so I disagree that men should steer clear of this topic.  It’s a confusing issue at best, and there are a lot of mixed signals out there, so I think it’s a conversation worth having. 

[Caseysgirl]

I think it's a little self serving that Bill thinks that because his humor is not well received by college kids that there is something wrong with THEM!  As anyone who follows comedy knows, there are comedians that are cool and topical in their day (Bob Hope and Bill Cosby come to mind) and as they get older become known as out of the loop or even crotchety.  I fear that Bill may be one of those comedians.  I saw his stand up, right before the election, and I am in his demographic and I felt he was out of tune.  He may soon be getting on the "wrong side" of the"#Me too" movement.

[sistermagpie]

11 hours ago, Fable said:

It’s a confusing issue at best, and there are a lot of mixed signals out there, so I think it’s a conversation worth having. 

But Bill's not really pushing for that conversation if he's claiming that people are putting Asiz Ansari in the same box as Harvey Weinstein. The AA thing was *all about* the mixed signals going on and what each person was ignoring and why. That conversation was a lot more honest and difficult than pointing to something like 50 shades and saying that if people like something as a fantasy it means they can't reject it in reality.

[charmed1]

I’ve never seen a single film that Bill cited in his rant. I did see Rocky III or IV (whichever one Apollo Creed died in) and I was about seven years old at the time. He may have missed the fact that every one of those films featured a cast of young white people in their 20s and 30s. Not exactly a lot of diversity there. And further, I think it’s pretty silly to reference these films as representative of women’s true feelings and therefore contrary or lending confusion to the #metoo movement. Just as it’s ridiculous to use gangsta rap as a representation of my life as a black person and therefore contrary to the Black Lives Matter movement. Or the argument that people like Dr. Dre or Snoop Dog, both of whom I find to be loathsome, have used the N-word frequently in their work, then it’s ok to use it. I should hope men aren’t blocking the passageways of their wives and are then confused as to why she’s calling the cops, because they saw Sylvester Stallone do it in a movie. 

[GHScorpiosRule]

3 hours ago, charmed1 said:

I should hope men aren’t blocking the passageways of their wives and are then confused as to why she’s calling the cops, because they saw Sylvester Stallone do it in a movie. 

I have to defend Rocky.  That scene was one of the most swoonworthy scenes ever. And of course Bill would take the one snippet and make it look like Adrian wanted to leave and Rocky was stopping her. Since this isn't the movie thread, I'll stop here. As for the 50 Shades of Suck? Those are horrid, horrid books, and written by someone who doesn't know how to write, and Bill is even mocking the Harry Potter books, and I'm just very angry right now. He used to be intelligent.

Edited February 19, 2018 by GHScorpiosRule

[ruby24]

I would defend the Rocky scenario because I think that was specific enough that it was clear what they were trying to show about Adrian was that she was so isolated, afraid and repressed that the idea was that even if she wanted to, she would never come out of herself unless someone pulled her out, so to speak.

I can see what that was going for, although I agree they may not be able to do that scene in a movie today (even though I love that scene too, I have to admit). If they did, it would have to be her story, to make that even more clear, I suppose. But it's Rocky's story in the movie, so I think the idea is that he sees and understands that about her. But Adrian was such a unique character, it's certainly not like they were trying to say ALL women are like her. Very few are (there would NEVER be a character like her in a movie now!)

That's why I think that's a bad example, actually.

Edited February 20, 2018 by ruby24

[wknt3]

On 2/17/2018 at 10:54 PM, Victor the Crab said:

Sigh. Why the fuck does Bill continue to make an ass of himself over women's issues? He has no ground for which to stand on and he comes off as a whinny little suck every time he brings it up. He sure sounds like he has something in his past to hide.

Why does Bill continue to make an ass out himself over Islam? Or medicine? Or any of a number of issues? It's because he's unable to listen to criticism and admit he might be wrong. To me it seems we're following the usual pattern whenever a new issue comes up:

1. Cluelessness. Something is all over the headlines and he feels he needs to discuss it, but doesn't feel compelled to do any real research. "I don't understand this. These guys are rich and famous! Why don't they just put on a nice shirt and a jacket and go to the club? There's all sorts of women willing to sleep with famous guys!" "I've been in the business a long time and never seen this sort of thing!"
2. The guests attempt to explain. "It's about power more than sex Bill." "People abuse authority even if they don't have to." "Woman have dealing with for years and men haven't been paying attention..."
3. Bill takes what he sees as a bold contrarian stance speaking the truths nobody else is willing to admit not realizing it's not as bold or brave as he thinks it is. Often there will be some degree of actual insight, but he doesn't realize that there are a lot of people saying the same thing (see step 1). "Maybe we shouldn't rush to judgement on Al Franken." "There is a difference between Weinstein and Ansari."
4. Bill uses the issue as an excuse to do old material maybe slightly updated and spins it as more bold truth telling. "Women, huh? They're crazy!"
5. Bill presents himself as persecuted by crazy lefties who don't realize he's on their side. "People need to realize there are degrees of misbehavior and just because we disagree on one case doesn't mean we're not on the same side." "Some Salon writer/a Twitter user/a protester/an MSNBC host said I didn't get it!" "I'm not excusing Harvey Weinstein's behavior! I'm not Mike Pence!"
6. Bill doubles down again and again. "Some people think I should shut up and talk about something else, but we need to have this conversation." "This reminds me of Berkeley..."

Edited February 20, 2018 by wknt3
revised and extended my remarks