No Fact Zone

Comments

1. vigwig

   

   said on 7th March: Reply

   Heavy sigh! The segment was clearly mocking breast implants and those who promote them.

   Q: “How many feminists does it take to change a light bulb?

   A: “That’s not funny”

   Unfortunately the too-close-to-reality premise behind this joke has undermined many progressive and positive aspects of the feminist movement over the years.
   However, the TCR writers could have thrown in a closing line like:
   “Breast implants are great! They stay hard so you can balance your breakfast tray on them.”
   Oh well.

   Shout Out (Hey!): 0
2. susan smith

   

   said on 7th March: Reply

   Really it is not so hard to understand why it is offensive. Breast implants can be deadly and disfiguring. To even give airtime to some idiot who is objectifying women by giving them away free is offensive. Colbert is smart enough that he could have highlighted IWD in a more affirmative way.

   Shout Out (Hey!): 0
3. Amanda

   

   said on 7th March: Reply

   I think there’s a difference between “feminist” and “feminazi” as some of my friends so lovingly call overzealous feminists.

   Getting that offended by a SATIRICAL news story on a SATIRICAL news show borders, if not crosses, that line. To me, it was clear that they were not condoning either the website or the idea of breast implants themselves, and I totally agree with you when you say that the time could be better spent writing letters for other causes that are plaguing our world in a more immediate fashion.

   I doubt (and hope) that Comedy Central and/or The Colbert Report will take any large measure to appease them. I suppose with every comedy endeavor there’s going to be someone who lacks a sense of humor and gets offended.

   Shout Out (Hey!): 0
4. Fargo

   

   said on 7th March: Reply

   This sort of thing always seems to happen. I think Jon mentioned it recently on Larry King. He said people think their shows are very funny, until they make fun of an issue they care about. Then it’s not funny anymore, because that was SRS BIZNIS, ok?

   It seems like they’re saying Stephen’s satire is usually crystal clear, until he talks about an issue they care about… now, suddenly, he isn’t doing it justice or isn’t being obvious enough about what the truth is. It’s easy for people to forget that the show is meant to entertain, not champion a cause.

   I also agree that if you want to change something, Comedy Central is the wrong place to be directing your letters :)

   Shout Out (Hey!): 0
5. Ms Interpreted

   

   said on 7th March: Reply

   @ susan,

   I didn’t say that I couldn’t understand why some might find it offensive; in fact, I said the reverse (“I do understand why these bloggers were upset by it …”). What I said was that I thought the segment quite clearly mocked the implant site’s creator. Clearly, you were offended by the mere fact of the segment’s existence, and I’m not questioning your right to have reacted that way.

   My feeling, however, is that Stephen has run segments “endorsing” many issues (guns in school, questionable pharmaceuticals, torture, etc.) that people would find provocative. As a satirist, he always has to assume that his audience will be able to understand when to take his statements at face value and, more importantly, when not to.

   Again, I’m not saying that your reaction is puzzling or invalid, despite my not sharing it. There are a lot of problems in this world of ours, and it’s great that people can react passionately to them. I just know that, in picking my activist battles (so to speak), the satirists aren’t the ones I’d choose to target.

   Shout Out (Hey!): 0
6. Josh

   

   said on 7th March: Reply

   It’s comedy plain and simple… I mean… come on?

   Shout Out (Hey!): 0
7. somuch2kno

   

   said on 7th March: Reply

   I have to say that while I was watching the segment, although I understood (or wanted to understand) that the show was in no way promoting breast implants, I did have to control the feeling that I wanted them to be more clear about it. Until Stephen’s last line. As soon as he closed with, “My eyes are up here!”, I knew that was the button. Subtle, but you get it. If you’re really listening.

   Shout Out (Hey!): 0
8. Ms Interpreted

   

   said on 7th March: Reply

   @ Amanda,

   I definitely get the distinction but, personally, I’m not too keen on the “feminazi” label; it’s a Rush Limbaugh-ism, and I’m not wild about letting him set the terms of the discourse.

   Shout Out (Hey!): 0
9. Gaia Faye

   

   said on 7th March: Reply

   I suppose part of what troubles me is that, rather than writing a complaint letter to Comedy Central, I think it might be more worthwhile to devote letter-writing time to something else. Perhaps there’s something you might find more important: the presidential campaign, Darfur, poverty, etc. Writing to Comedy Central just seems too … small, IMO.

   While I got the joke of the segment, I disagree with this. There’s always something more important to be done. To ask why people are concerned about the effects of the segment instead of more important matters can be countered by asking why this blog isn’t concerned with more important matters, can it not?

   Shout Out (Hey!): 0
10. Olivia

    

    said on 7th March: Reply

    I suppose part of what troubles me is that, rather than writing a complaint letter to Comedy Central, I think it might be more worthwhile to devote letter-writing time to something else. Perhaps there’s something you might find more important: the presidential campaign, Darfur, poverty, etc. Writing to Comedy Central just seems too … small, IMO.

    Aaah, come on, that’s an equivocator’s trick. No one has a finite capacity for concern about the world around them, we all know that. It’s perfectly possible to pay attention to both big and little issues that interest us. And the little issues are especially important as far as feminism is concerned, because sexism is so ingrained in the culture that fighting it requires attacking more little things than big ones. We’re not fighting for suffrage, education or property rights any more, and rather than trying to win reproductive rights, we’re (thankfully, I suppose) in the position of defending the ones we already have. Instead, the day-to-day struggles are with the prevalence of impossible beauty standards over women’s health and happiness and gender stereotyping on TV, in movies, in language, in advertising and marketing, in the media… Big problems are made up of little parts. The Feminist Peace Network called this one wrong, but as a girl and a feminist, I’m reassured to know that if they interpret someone’s actions as misogynist, they’re going to call him on it, not think about it and decide it’s not worth the time and trouble. We’ve kept our mouths shut long enough. How long does it take to write a complaining e-mail, anyway?

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
11. Ms Interpreted

    

    said on 7th March: Reply

    @ Gaia Faye and Olivia,

    I suppose that’s fair, although I don’t generally consider my Stephen Colbert blogging hobby as being a factor in any great social causes. My opinion — that I’d first address someone other than the satirists when I take the time to write letters — hasn’t changed, though.

    And again, I’d reiterate that I’m not trying to invalidate anyone’s reaction to the segment. I’m saying that I don’t share that particular reaction, that I’m choosing not to write to Comedy Central, and that my decision is, in many ways, influenced by what I see as the nature of satire (i.e. that it takes an absurdist position that relies on its audience’s ability to perceive irony … and it will therefore nearly always have its critics).

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
12. daphne

    

    said on 7th March: Reply

    Its too bad that people take satire the wrong way sometimes. But i wanted to say that i think no cause is too insignificant to fight for and I feel like its important to stand up for what you believe in no matter what. Plus, it doesn’t take that much effort to write a letter/email!

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
13. Tina

    

    said on 7th March: Reply

    I think that if anyone wants to get upset about the subject of the segment, they should write complaining emails to the guy that the segment was about!

    Why write Comedy Central? They brought the outrage / injustice to your attention! You should thank them for the information & take your ire out on that Justin guy… IMHO

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
14. meaculpa

    

    said on 7th March: Reply

    I didn’t find the segment funny at all, but that doesn’t mean I took it to have an anti-feminist message. The segment made this fellow look like the misogynistic fool that he is. I thought they could have approached it differently, but hey, things like this can’t always be perfect. The somewhat recent poll-dancing workout segment I also found to be a little sad…but the message and the approach was infinitely more hilarious, and, one might say, pro-feminist. I would really love to hear what my hero(ine), Jessica Valenti, who appeared on TCR for Full Frontal Feminism, has to say about this type of satire.

    Thanks for this entry, guys.

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
15. WordsWithGrace

    

    said on 7th March: Reply

    “The Difference Makers” may be the Report’s most subtle and/or risky segment, because the folks being satirized are mostly allowed to present their case and let their ridiculousness (hopefully) speak for itself. However, one of the many things I admire about the TCR writers is how they usually add some clever twist that just punctures the arguments of the subjects all to h*&^ and leaves me gleeful and amazed.

    In this case, I happen to agree with the critics that that element was missing, and that the piece could have been much more effective as a piece of satire had it been included.

    For instance, in an earlier Difference Makers segment, on the “Harriet Tubman of fireworks” (a merchant selling fireworks near the border of Massachusetts, which had banned their sale), not only did we hear at length from the merchant and a customer, but a cop was interviewed to point out why Mass. might have done this (talking about the type of injuries that have resulted from fireworks), and his comments were intercut with those of the enthusiastic (but somewhat clueless) customer:
    http://www.comedycentral.com/sitewide/media_player/play.jhtml?itemId=71255

    I recall a similar technique used to hilarious effect in a DM segment on the “Susan B. Anthony of pole dancing” (unfortunately the clip is no longer available), in which comments from male onlookers were intercut with her argument that pole dancing was a feminist cause. The men completely contradicted what she was saying and undercut her argument.

    So I think at least part of what critics are reacting to is the lack of any such “voice of reason” in the piece. Stephen’s comment at the end was perfect (much like his exploding firework at the end of the DM segment on fireworks), but it’s not the same as having an oppositional voice woven throughout the piece.

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
16. jem

    

    said on 7th March: Reply

    i’m a feminist, and i found nothing wrong with that segment. they were very clearly making fun of the website, its creator, the men who frequent it, and yes, even those women. anyone who’s ever watched the show knows that anyone “stephen” endorses is probably kind of an awful person. THAT IS THE POINT. they were highlighting the general skeeziness and wtfness of it. i get how people might have been made uncomfortable by it (even people who understood that it was satire), but enough to write to comedy central about it? really? THAT is the segment that’s got people up in arms?

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
17. ColbertFaninChicago

    

    said on 7th March: Reply

    Sigh. Some people really are satire-impaired. Hint: it wouldn’t BE the Colbert Report if “Stephen” were to end with a public service announcement about the dangers of breast implants or how terrible it is to judge women on cup size.

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
18. Splendiferous_Zeppelin

    

    said on 7th March: Reply

    I don’t think the segment was offensive at all, and I consider myself a feminist.

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
19. Daydream

    

    said on 7th March: Reply

    Put me in the “I consider myself a feminist and I didn’t think the segment was offensive” column. The segment was funny but also a sad commentary on a number of issues. It’s satire, after all.

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
20. One of the Heroes

    

    said on 7th March: Reply

    I understand why people who are not familiar with satire and with TCR would be offended by this segment but I have to admit I am surprised that so many Colbert fans had issues with it.

    I may be missing something but I thought they did a good job of showing how sleezy and ridiculous the Web master and the men that contribute to that Web site are. Some of those men sounded very creepy. As a woman, I would be afraid to involve myself with those people even if I let my physical attributes dictate my self worth. I thought the segment painting these men in a very bad light.

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
21. Lisa

    

    said on 7th March: Reply

    I didn’t think the entire segment was side-splitting, only because, to me anyway, the irony and the satire of the piece was obvious. But, it was entertaining nonetheless. And I’d like to echo Fargo’s sentiments about what Jon said on Larry King.

    I personally believe in order to really appreciate the satire of both TCR and TDS that you need to have pretty thick skin and be able to laugh at yourself. I actually find that Jon Stewart laughs harder at jokes the writers write about him more than anything else on his show (okay, maybe at tosses to Stephen…).

    Bottom line: between these two shows, nothing is off limits to be made fun of, and both shows have gone above and beyond the realms mentioned here before (obviously, none of those that are upset have seen Strangers with Candy; that is quite edgier at times than this aforementioned field piece.). Comedy Central pretty much gives them free reign, and I’d hate for that to be taken away or censored because a few people got upset over an obviously satiric piece about some guy giving away free boob jobs over the internet. In my opinion, if you can’t take the satiric heat, get out of the Truthiness kitchen.

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
22. hard done by

    

    said on 7th March: Reply

    When i first saw that segment i just thought -they are trying to have there cake and eat it too much here,getting to show a lot of breast within the context of satire ,i thought he did the same thing with the hot pole dancing lady.Its softcore and the veil of satire draped over it is just too thin for some.

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
23. One of the Heroes

    

    said on 7th March: Reply

    @Lisa
    Well said.

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
24. Ms Interpreted

    

    said on 7th March: Reply

    “I consider myself a feminist and I didn’t think the segment was offensive”

    At the end of the day, that’s probably the quote that says it all: Feminists are not a monolithic entity. We can and do have differences of opinion, and this segment obviously sparked a number of them.

    Thanks for keeping the discussion relatively civil.

    And for those of you with some time on your hands (either because you’re not writing letters or because you’ve already done so), treat yourself to some less controversial Colbert Report videos here.

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
25. unanimousvote

    

    said on 7th March: Reply

    Who’s gonna pay for my breast reduction? That’s what I wanna know. And I do joke about giving about half of what I’ve got away. No takers so far. Plus do you really think some rollo dogface is gonna get free drinks just for having bomber bazookas? That was very serious comedy the other night and if it prompts discussion then once again the task has been a success through reverse education. Also funny that dorkmaster the web-boss gets more action now. In conclusion I would like to add that I wouldn’t mind seeing implants outlawed but I do feel for those who need re- constructive surgery after breast cancer. What do the fem-blogs say about those women?

    UU

    ps ~ I’ve gotten a few free drinks in my day. eheheh

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
26. EvilDevil

    

    said on 7th March: Reply

    it was sad and funny, and of course it suppouse to be offensive, otherwise whats the point? if u are mad, dont be mad at CC or stephen, but instead to the guy that runs that website… seriously, some people need to regain their sense of humor…

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
27. looped linear

    

    said on 7th March: Reply

    I think there was no overt ‘counterpoint’ on implants, added into this segment (by Drs, etc), because all the participants were so obviously foolish/pathetic/unattractive.

    *They* made getting implants seem like a totally loser thing to do–both as a sponsor, and as a recipient. And ridicule is a far more effective deterrent than health concerns.

    The participants tried to play it off as cool, or socially necessary, or even a generous thing to do (for the sponsors) .

    But the nice /respectful guy image of the sponsors was undercut by descriptions of the ‘favours’ they’d ask for from the girls (a picture in an elf suit?)

    Everything costs something, maybe *especially* ‘free’ boobs, so each girl, perhaps, got to become a bit of a whore (and a *cheap* whore at that!) to ‘thank’ the ‘nice’ guys who’ve helped pay for the boobs.

    And the grateful girls image, was undercut by their honest-yet-stupid remarks, ranging from just sad (~”fake boobs can replace other things you lack”… ), to the pathetic (“you get more attention with fake boobs”), to the avaricious (“I haven’t had to pay for a drink yet since I got them”).

    And the guy who runs the site, who now gets lots of girls whereas, before, he just got a few… well… I can see why he got just a few before.
    And both he and his *very * unprepossessing friend like fake boobs….hmmmmm…

    For both sponsors and recipients: if you bait for sharks, you can’t claim to be surprised when you end up catching … sharks.

    Hey! *I’m* up here.

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
28. Lisa

    

    said on 7th March: Reply

    @ Ms. I,
    *sigh* Ahhh, more singing…that segment was like a warm fuzzy blanket on a cold evening. Thanks!

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
29. Tonks

    

    said on 7th March: Reply

    hear hear, Lisa! well said.

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
30. Amanda

    

    said on 7th March: Reply

    @ Ms Interpreted:

    I don’t personally use the term “feminazi” either. I don’t think it’s appropriate or even funny, but some of my friends have used it before as a sort of taunt or joke. I said “so lovingly” sarcastically, but unfortunately sarcasm is hard to detect in text form. That was my mistake and I apologize.

    I totally agree in the idea of not letting Rush Limbaugh set the term of discourse. I was just using it as an example.

    I too, consider myself a feminist. In an ideal world, everyone can see everyone else as equals and disregard sex, race, religion, background, sexual orientation, etc and it is very unfortunate that some people still don’t feel equality amongst all people. However, as everyone has been saying, I really don’t think that Stephen or the writers of the Colbert Report meant anything by it.

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
31. supernova8610

    

    said on 7th March: Reply

    I wish people, like those described in the article, would just lay off of Stephen. x-(

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
32. IAMmissAMERICA

    

    said on 7th March: Reply

    Most of us are ‘it-getters’, some of us are not. A sad reflection of society. Sometimes a good way to expose something is to let it speak for itself. An excellent segment I thought.

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
33. supernova8610

    

    said on 7th March: Reply

    Agreed; I thought it was a very good segment.

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
34. Caitlin

    

    said on 8th March: Reply

    oh dear… unfortunately certain overzealous feminists focus on things that really don’t deserve more than a thoughtful conversation and thus why so many people still have a negative viewpoint of feminism. I’m definitely a feminist but sometimes I’m left scratching my head over the level some people want to take their objections to, especially when dealing with comedy, and extra especially when dealing with smart/clever comedy like TCR

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
35. Catholic Colbert

    

    said on 8th March: Reply

    I never particularly like the Difference Maker segments. They’re a dark, edgy kind of satire, another way Stephen pushes the envelope. I can appreciate them, but I’d rather laugh. Just me.

    I always find myself wondering if the people being interviewed ever figure out that he’s making fun of their positions. In this one, especially.

    Always balancing the position would be like the “professional driver, closed course” small print on the car commercials. Duh! Give the audience some credit. We’re not all 18-24 year old frat boys.

    And now if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to go watch the duet again while I’m here!

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
36. unanimousvote

    

    said on 8th March: Reply

    It would be great if the Feminist Peace Network put a link to this site’s discussion into their on-going discussion. It would complete the educational loop. Do they have the balls?

    U

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0
37. Amanda

    

    said on 8th March: Reply

    The thing is though, that a lot of Stephen’s wit and humor outside The Colbert Report IS sort of dark, edgy satire. Between “Wigfield” and some thematic elements in “Strangers With Candy”, even some scenes from “Exit 57″, some of what they do is downright disturbing, but still funny in a sick, black humor sort of way.

    I’m a fan of dark humor, but not everyone is. I mean, I didn’t find this particular piece hilarious, but I recognized that they were making fun of this guy and his friends and all the girls that got the breast implants. It all comes down to what someone said earlier: To some people it’s all fun and games until something you believe in is made fun of. Then it’s not funny anymore.

    Shout Out (Hey!): 0