Cenk, Ben Mankiewicz, & Grace Baldridge. Rouge employee shuts down Trump’s twitter for 11 min. “House of Cards” employees say Kevin Spacey assaulted them. Restaurant puts up before and after Caitlyn Jenner photos on restroom doors. White nationalists shared bomb-making manuals online. Wisconsin bill allows toddlers to hunt.
0 seconds of 39 minutes, 58 secondsVolume 90%
Press shift question mark to access a list of keyboard shortcuts
Keyboard Shortcuts
Shortcuts Open/Close/ or ?
Play/PauseSPACE
Increase Volume↑
Decrease Volume↓
Seek Forward→
Seek Backward←
Captions On/Offc
Fullscreen/Exit Fullscreenf
Mute/Unmutem
Decrease Caption Size-
Increase Caption Size+ or =
Seek %0-9
Comments
If cis can’t question with Honest heart about LGBT topics then What’s the point of supporting a community that demands us cispeople to understand them IF u just want cis to do ur COMMANDS and NOT UNDERSTAND?! u can’t UNDERSTAND what is NEVER TALKED ABOUT?!
Late to the party as usual but about the restaurant…
“Political correctness gets in the way of real discussion” is NOT a statement worth respecting. It’s something that people say when they get called out for doing something shitty and they don’t want to admit they were wrong. Prominent people in the trans community spoke up, explained why they didn’t like, explained why it was wrong, and the restaurant didn’t acknowledge it and instead put out a bullshit statement about being “too pc”. In fact, I was more sympathetic to the restaurant (just thought they made a bad joke) until Grace read their statement. It’s bullshit case closed. If they really cared about a conversation they would be having a conversation with the trans people that are speaking out against it not talking about PC culture. I am extremely disappointed that this panel was so quick to defend that statement.
Gotta back Ben up here on the t-shirts.
My Covfefe t-shirt is the most comfortable t-shirt I own. I usually don’t take it off for two days when I wear it because it’s that comfortable.
My Bernie Wrecking Ball t-shirt has my favorite graphic on it, but, man, it’s one of those stiff, uncomfortable t-shirts Ben is talking about. Whatevs. It’s a decent trade-off for that awesome graphic.
Other super comfy t-shirts from shoptyt include the Chump t-shirt and the RUN DNC t-shirt. So soft and snuggly!
PS – can I get retroactive shoptyt points?!
Late to the party but has no one seen Tim & Eric? That is definitely not a Chippy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqbx5oh5eHQ
I really would love if you guys would hire a trans person as an anchor who gets trans issues.
I’m not saying that you guys are completely wrong, but the panel did make me realize how little even Grace knows about these issues.
Which is infuriating as a trans person who loves TYT. I’ve never even seen trans guest anchors.
Trans people are ashamed of their old bodies and proud of their new ones….
To put it in terms non-trans community might understand…
So, someone who has undergone extreme weight loss surgery……That’s like putting someone’s fat picture on a desert bar…and their skinny picture on a salad bar…
That’s embarrassing…. insensitive. Yes factual, yes a joke….but a joke at someone else’s expense without their permission.
Not ok….
Great way to explain it. Thank you so much for educating. :-)
The extreme challenges faced by transitioning transpeople are too numerous and complicated to fit within the size limits of a comment on this forum.
Suffice it to say that posting pre- and post-transition photos of any transperson on public restroom doors is IMO an idiotic publicity stunt and/or public hazing regardless of whose photos are posted.
The charged atmosphere even pre-Trump makes such move an incitement to violence.
Some transpeople are in ‘deep stealth’ mode, including new social security numbers as allowed under federal guidelines. Posting before/after photos of Jenner in such space is abusive and also invites the ‘outing’ of suspected ‘deep stealth’ transsexuals whose lives might be endangered. Some are not even ‘out’ to their current spouses and consider their medical history to be privileged information that no one has access to unless necessary for ongoing treatment.
When Harry Benjamin first began supervising transitions, he insisted on pre-transition divorce and also strongly urged the equivalent of witness relocation program where all ties with the past are broken. This was to protect the physicians from medical malpractice lawsuits filed by hostile relatives who would be unable to name or locate the post-transition family member and file suit against medical providers even in the absence of legal standing after divorce.
No one would be told the truth, not even the spouse. For people who could not get a no-fault divorce, that could be a show-stopper without some proof of shenanigans on the part of the respondent, particularly for Catholics who did not believe in divorce and might be more open to frying the loved one’s brain with electroshock and torturing with ipecac than letting a transition proceed.
‘Deep stealth’ was sold to the patient as a means of protecting pre-transition individuals from making an ill-advised choice to endure lifelong discrimination as a publicly transitioning and out transsexual in the 1950s-60s-70s and some transpeople still depend on ‘deep stealth’ even now.
Even today a spouse can still sue for loss of access to the function and appearance of genitals. The divorce, or signed consent of the spouse, is still a requirement. This is the only condition I know of where the spouse has veto rights over medically necessary treatment that involves the use of no foreign tissue from that spouse to realize treatment. Cross-gender hormones cause temporary sterility that eventually becomes permanent so even hormonal therapy requires spousal consent or divorce.
The ‘real life test’ is another such hazing that transsexuals endure in transition, where they have to prove themselves worthy of medically necessary treatment by remaining gainfully employed and socially integrated throughout transition, without deteriorating mentally under the strain of stigma. It is another med mal butt cover that is disingenuously sold as a benefit to the patient with the assertion that such endurance proves ‘readiness’ for a medical necessity that is intrinsically and fundamentally unrelated in any way other than in the risk that public condemnation presents to everyone involved in the transition.
Treating anyone’s transition as a joke on restroom doors, or using someone’s pre- and post-transition photos to make a political point anywhere, is a stupid thing to do for any reason let alone politics. Personally I see it as most likely a cheap a publicity stunt to boost business on the back of Jenner’s fame because there is no other logical reason to do it.
What is up with the Member Tee this year? You guys sent us one last year, and I have never heard about this incentive again.
Can you give us, who care about it, an update?
Looking at https://tytnetwork.com/secure/membership-account/membership-levels/, if you’re a producer or higher: “Email support@tytnetwork.com to claim your perk”
Ben is throwing some salt about these shirts and I love it! More salty Ben!!!
Perhaps, a rouge employee (in vid description), should be rogue. I love the idea of a rouge employee though…
Am I the only one who is curious about what the tweet was going to be?
Would it be disrespectful to show a picture of someone before they came out as gay and after and used that to I don’t know, denote whether you were on a dating site looking for a gay or straight relationship? It seems messed up to me. The fact of how famous they are would be irrelevant in that case, wouldn’t it?
In fact, I’ve seen pictures of Rachel Maddow when she had long blonde hair contrasted with how she looks now and the people posting them are always like, ha ha, as if it’s meaningful in some way that she is less feminine now. They don’t do it to start a conversation but rather to make fun of her.
Ben saying that somebody gaining access to Trump’s twitter account is “not a big deal” is completely moronic. I only listen to what Ben has to say so that I how a completely brain-dead insouciant idiot would process current events. Remember the time Ben shouted down Jimmy with “words matter!! language matters!!”? Trump’s words matter too, as well as the words of a hostile actor playing Trump.
nice use of “insouciant”, but I think what Ben was saying is not that it’s not a big deal, but that in order to run Twitter, someone has to have the ability to affect accounts. Whether it’s 500, 50, or 1 person, someone has the ability to affect his account. Even ignoring Twitter staff, someone could hack his account. The issue is an unstable president, not Twitter. The real threat is that Trump himself has access to his Twitter account and the levers of US power. That’s what Ben is saying. The issue is Trump, not Twitter. The hostile actor is Trump himself.
Starting a conversation with the sexist racist smear that “the viewpoints of these white males are invalid” is horrible. Please re-think your concept of fairness and the racist, sexist, and other “ist” anti-love viewpoints that certain other individuals also push while pretending to be against those bad things. The way to fight racism and sexism isn’t with more racism and sexism.
public service announcement for pathetic, fake outrage white men:
Racism and sexism involve power dynamics. Women and people of color face real oppression. Saying that your experience as a white male is not valid in a discussion about people who face oppression you don’t understand is not, and can never be, sexist or racist. You’re just throwing a pathetic tantrum about an issue that cannot and does not affect you. You’re so used to everything being for and about you, that even being excluded from victimhood upsets you. Sometimes, other people get to talk and not you. Grow the fuck up and deal with it.
“Saying that your experience as a white male is not valid in a discussion about people who face oppression you don’t understand is not, and can never be, sexist or racist.”
1) That’s the very definition of sexism, racism, etc. Telling someone their opinion doesn’t matter for superfluous reasons that do not pertain to the current topic is insane and evil. Telling a black person to GTFO of a protest for equal rights for everyone is just as wrong as telling a white person to GTFO out of the same protest.
2) You shifted it from “someone saying someone else’s onion is invalid due to their sex, race, gender, etc” to “someone saying their own opinion is invalid due to sex, race, gender, etc”. The former is wrong and they have low self-esteem perhaps, the second is sexist, racist, etc.
Your logic is poison, and attempts to turn the weak against the weak, to disrupt and cause infighting in those struggling for equal rights and to topple the powerful at the top who enslave everyone else. But hey, keep mud slinging against someone who is on your side instead of, in your words, growing the fuck up. And if you didn’t catch it, that was sarcasm, and to demonstrate that you’re mudslinging. Can’t have a rational conversation with someone who does that and smears and tries to character assassinate others for no reason, which is exactly the point of my original post.
“the viewpoints of these white males are invalid” isn’t automatically sexist/racist. For the topic of “things that white males DON’T experience” then yes, white male viewpoints and experiences are pretty useless. It’s not a sexist smear for the panel to express the thought of “hey, we’re all cis-gendered, our viewpoint on ‘was this thing respectful for transgender people’ is inferior to the viewpoint of a transgender person”. In fact, it was very respectful.
You claim that it would be racist and sexist to declare white male opinions less valid on THIS topic. But actually it’s the other way around; It would be incredibly sexist and racist to claim that all genders/races have equally valid opinions on the topic of “things that [marginalized group] has to deal with”. If you’re not part of that marginalized group, your opinion isn’t as valid as someone from that group. To claim that your opinion is JUST as valid would imply that the marginalized persons’ opinion would be no different from a white man.
Now, I’m specifically talking about the topic of ‘what [marginalized group] goes through’. I’m not saying that any race or gender is any more or less valid than any other.
Making a pre-emptive smear and judgment by telling someone their viewpoint is automatically invalid for a superfluous reason is the very definition of “ism”. If someone smeared you by telling you that your opinions about the subject of whether or not, say, Syrian refugees should be allowed into the country, that your viewpoints on the issue didn’t matter because you weren’t from Syria yourself, that would be insulting and wrong of them. It would be just as wrong of them as it was in this situation. If those panelists then went on to make outrageous or silly statements, then they could easily be called out for the particular logic that they’re using and challenged on an intellectual level. Questioning and challenging someone’s ideas is perfectly okay. But rejecting someone’s ideas before they’ve even begun simply because of their emotions, gender, species, age, or for any other reason without even giving them a chance to speak first and weigh their ideas on an intellectual level is fundamentally disrespectful and “ist”.
Let me use a second point to drive it home, an economic example this time. If someone wanted to discuss whether or not golf courses should be allowed to be built near mansions, and someone who was poor, Hispanic, Muslim, gay, etc etc, the most potentially-disadvantaged individual you can think of, was on a panel, would you tell them, “hey, your opinion isn’t valid, you make me uncomfortable being involved in a discussion on the issue, fuck off” then that’s a horrible and evil thing to say to them, just as it is in the reversed scenario. You don’t know what their ideas are until you’ve heard them, so you can’t judge the value of their ideas yet. That’s like a school teacher telling the class, “Suse, lower your hand, your ideas are dumb already just because you have a pussy. I feel uncomfortable with you discussing a subject that is male-related, so you don’t get to speak.” Fuck that. That’s sexism, and this panel’s example was sexist and racist too.
“You claim that it would be racist and sexist to declare white male opinions less valid on THIS topic.” – Correct, due to the reasons I laid out above. Just because someone has a particular skin color doesn’t immediately invalidate their opinion just because a topic could be more relevant, impacting, and understood by someone besides them. For example, if you brought up the topic of let’s say “African American struggles”, and Obama was on the panel, does that invalidate his opinion about the subject because he’s rich, or does that validate his opinion just because he’s black? How about neither, and STFU, until you hear what he says, and THEN judge his opinions based on the merit of his ideas, and not before. We already know what Obama thinks on many topics, and he’s a piece of shit for it because he’s an evil corrupt traitorous sellout, but until we knew what he was going to say, or would probably say, about a particular issue, he should not be pre-judged about it.
“But actually it’s the other way around; It would be incredibly sexist and racist to claim that all genders/races have equally valid opinions on the topic of “things that [marginalized group] has to deal with”. If you’re not part of that marginalized group, your opinion isn’t as valid as someone from that group.” – I already covered this in my points above. Just because you are a certain race, gender, etc, does NOT invalidate your opinion about a particular subject because a) you may or may not have experienced the exact or related struggles, b) you could have been a particular gender/race and NOT experienced the particular struggles being discussed, and c) it doesn’t matter either way, you can still give your opinion about the particular issue, and your opinion is not incorrect just because of your gender, race, etc. It may be wrong! It may be biased! And if either of those things are true, THEN you can attack the person’s idea based on its merit, but not before, otherwise you’re being a racist, sexist, etc judgmental asshole. And nothing against assholes (the good kind). :3
“To claim that your opinion is JUST as valid would imply that the marginalized persons’ opinion would be no different from a white man.” – Opinions can be JUST as valid, and in fact equal, as one another, and should be, regardless of someone’s gender, age, race, etc. If someone was a different gender, race, etc than me, and they said they thought oxygen was good, then me agreeing with that and saying the same thing is completely valid for both of us. If I then shared something in my life that I struggled with, and they didn’t struggle with it, but expressed an opinion against it just as I did, that doesn’t make their opinion against it any less valid. If I say I hate how rich people have taken over the government, and a rich person says they hate that too, does it make their opinion less valid just because they’re rich? That idea is insane. It’s perfectly understandable if someone doesn’t understand something as much because they haven’t dealt with it, and like I said, that’s still 100% possible regardless of your personal attributes, and that’s what makes it even sillier. Just because someone is, say, poor and black, doesn’t mean they’ve experienced police abuse. They might be from a country that has a great social safety net and has a well-maintained police force that isn’t corrupt.
Also, who said I was white? lol
“Now, I’m specifically talking about the topic of ‘what [marginalized group] goes through’. I’m not saying that any race or gender is any more or less valid than any other.” – Police violence, for example, can be experienced by anyone. It is more likely to occur against the downtrodden, but that doesn’t mean certain people with certain attributes will experience police abuse, or that others with other attributes will never experience it. These two things are not one in the same: police abuse, and race X. Even if they were, and 100% of abuse happened to race X and not to race Y, that doesn’t invalidate the opinions about the issue coming from race Y. Their opinions COULD be invalid, but to say they’re invalid just because of their race is racist.
“Making a pre-emptive smear and judgment by telling someone their viewpoint is automatically invalid for a superfluous reason is the very definition of “ism””
Except it’s not done for a superfluous reason. It’s done for a specific reason. People who have not personally experienced oppression based on their gender are not as qualified to talk about discrimination based on gender as people who have experienced gender-based oppression.
Remember, this is SPECIFICALLY for the topic of gender-based oppression. You keep taking the context of the discussion out so you can say “how dare you imply opinions aren’t all created equal”. The topic was not “oxygen is good”, the topic that the panel responded to was about the oppression that transgender people feel. Nobody on the panel is transgender so they acknowledged the invalidity of their opinions in order to not be condescending.
But since you brought it up, I don’t even agree with the statement “‘oxygen is good’ is a valid opinion regardless of who’s saying it”. Even then, some opinions will be more valid than others. Obviously not between races or genders (that would be horrendously racist or sexist as you correctly point out) but depending on other factors, namely experience. A NASA scientist or someone with a major in chemical engineering has a much better understanding of oxygen and it’s properties than someone without a science background. Their opinion will be drastically more valid than someone who’s never studied in any STEM field.
“If I say I hate how rich people have taken over the government, and a rich person says they hate that too, does it make their opinion less valid just because they’re rich? That idea is insane.”
Yes, but you forgot to consider the reverse of that situation. Them having more money and being around rich people makes their opinion MORE valid than yours. They interact with a lot more rich people than you and would have a much better understanding of exactly how the rich people have taken over the government. Their experience makes their opinion more valuable. Thus, still a situation where two peoples’ opinions are not equally valid.
“Just because someone is, say, poor and black, doesn’t mean they’ve experienced police abuse. They might be from a country that has a great social safety net and has a well-maintained police force that isn’t corrupt.”
First of all, I’d love to know where such a utopia exists but more importantly, it doesn’t matter where they come from. They’ll still experience racism in this country, thus they will still have more personal experience with racism and will thus have a much more valid opinion on racism. And just to make sure, we’re talking about experiencing discrimination, not just police abuse.
“Also, who said I was white? lol”
Not me, I qualified my statement with an “if”: “If you’re not part of that marginalized group, your opinion isn’t as valid as someone from that group.”
“Police violence, for example, can be experienced by anyone. It is more likely to occur against the downtrodden, but that doesn’t mean certain people with certain attributes will experience police abuse, or that others with other attributes will never experience it.”
It’s not a binary question of whether or not someone experiences police abuse. It’s a question of how LIKELY someone is, or how frequently they are a victim of police abuse. Also, this example is completely different from the initial problem that got you so worked up in the first place: The question was “is it offensive to transgender people to have a pre-op and post-op photos of them denoted as bathroom signs?” and the panel determined they do not have a valid opinion due to their cis-gendered status (which begs the question how’d you feel like this was racist?). Unlike police abuse, this is not an experience they could have ‘randomly’ come across. None of them are transgender, although Grace, and I agree with her, has an opinion with at least SOME validity since she regularly dresses in attire that’s typically worn by a different gender.
“It is more likely to occur against the downtrodden, but that doesn’t mean certain people with certain attributes will experience police abuse, or that others with other attributes will never experience it.”
You’ve conclusively proven that police abuse happens to people regardless of race. But certain people with certain attributes will experience it DRASTICALLY more often than others. Fillando Castille was stopped 40 times by the cops. For no reason. I dunno about you but I’ve been stopped one in my life by the police and it was because I was speeding. And I am white. But even if my anecdotal experience didn’t fit the premise, we have the data and the science to demonstrate a clear correlation between someone race and how frequently they get abused by the police. It’s not a binary question of “only people of these races experience police abuse” but certain segments of the population experience it far more than other segments.
And this is a strawman argument to begin with, since discrimination is FAR more vast than just ‘police abuse’ and some of it is definitely only felt by people of color (like Asian-Americans being told “no but where are you REAAAAALLY from”, to give a mild example)
“Their opinions COULD be invalid, but to say they’re invalid just because of their race is racist.”
No. It’s not at all racist to say that a white man’s opinion on ‘how it feels to face discrimination as a non-white’ is invalid because of his race. Just like it’s not sexist to say to a cis-male “your opinion on how it feels to give birth is completely and utterly invalid because of your sex”. Like, it literally is. He doesn’t have a womb. His opinion is beyond useless.
For another example, say you’re considering open-heart surgery. Would you consider a qualified carpenter and a qualified doctor to have equally valid opinions on that specific topic?
Look it is transphobic Ben, because Trans women are women and Kaitlyn was a woman even when she was Bruce, even if she’s still sell out sack of shit, she’s still a woman, and disrespecting Trans people shouldn’t be a joke in my opinion.
Forgive me if my thought seems wrong-headed or insensitive. I’m not well-studied in this area…
Replace Bruce Jenner pic with Chaz Bono and put bold-lettered signs (not just those little ones), MEN (on Chaz) and WOMEN (on Kaitlyn). That’s a confirmation of their gender status, no?
Interesting how Cenk pronounces controversy (23:30). Heard it several times before. Love you Cenk!
Oh great a story about Jenner! With nothing on the DNC. Fuck this Jimmy is so right about the main show sometimes, he’s posted a 20 minute video on his YouTube channel covering it?
They already covered the DNC.
WTF! Where is the coverage of the biggest story… on the DNC? Fuck Chump being locked out of his Twitter account, I don’t give a fuck! This is bull shit, At the beginning of the first hour it was mentioned as a segment and Ben seemed to have some really interesting points he wanted to talk about, the calling of it as being “rigged” etc. WTF!!!
Yay Ben is here still! Keep the vodka coming for the hair! And NO KITTY this is my (Marie Callendar’s) Pot Pie! NO KITTY THAT’S A BAD KITTY!!!!! And GAWD not to be a downer but I remember past TYT fundraisers that worked WAY better than Alison’s donations. You guys really think you can take on FIENSTEIN with $147K??? Seriously?!? You guys are smoking too much pot.
On Kevin Spacey, YES to what Ben says; the problem of sexual harassment is so very prevalent in entertainment because SO MANY production crew and staffers and bit part actors, etc are all waiting RIGHT BEHIND YOU to fill your slot in 5 seconds flat if you rock the boat about ANYTHING. Hell, half the younger people in Hollywood would knife their mom in the back for an Unpaid INTERNSHIP, seriously. I applaud the courage of all the men coming forward to stand against ALL sexual harassment. Keep it going brothers and sisters! #MeToo And such a good point by Cenk with the fake president fired but the real president off-the-hook. As Trump would say: SAD!
Merchandise: The #Covfefe shirt is the best. I want it. Last time I checked it was out-of-stock I guess. Please make more!
As a Transgendered person myself, all of the hosts today missed the fundamental point on the Jenner store. The point is *our genitals don’t define our gender*! Not all of us in our community are famous and can afford VERY expensive surgeries, the most flattering clothes, the best makeup, etc. I have lived for almost two decades now as a woman, and while I always wanting the final genital surgery, I couldn’t afford it. The price of it goes up every single year. I don’t just mean inflation. I mean that, for instance surgery with a respected and competent surgery when I was say 22 years old I could get for $12500 here in the USA. Now I’m 38 and good luck finding ANYONE who can do it competently in America for less than $50,000. And that’s just full genital surgery, that does not include the Breast Augmentation and Facial Feminization Surgery (FFS) which I did not need but that are absolute essential for some TG sisters to feel that they need it to “pass” or “blend” and be fully accepted by the majority of strangers as a woman (or a man in the case of my TG brothers). I will probably never have enough money in the rest of my entire life given my other emotional and physical issues to have full, final genital surgery, but I AM STILL ME. I AM STILL A WOMAN. I have used the ladies room with no questions or problems for nearly two decades now.
The restaurant in question, which unfortunately in my home state of Texas (though I haven’t been to that restaurant) offends us not just because of the superficial “Ha-Ha” Joke against Jenner, but because you are, with a giant 8 foot tall blown up photo, telling us that unless we had all that work done that Jenner could afford, we don’t belong in the Ladies Room – or at the very least you are going to make many of us believe that. Yes, the majority of us in the TG community, including myself, DESPISE Jenner, BUT THAT IS NOT THE POINT. Please stop demeaning us and reducing our lives to a SICK joke and then hide behind the Trumpian excuse of “we’re protesting political correctness!”. NO! BULLSHIT! You just wanted a laugh at our expense. You wanted a “dialogue”?! BS! You didn’t expect it to go viral and you were caught BEING BIGOTS. Just ADMIT IT, APOLOGIZE, and then we can move on.
Ana would have understood this, and it’s a good thing for you Cenk that she wasn’t there because your clock would’ve been cleaned. Shame on you! Shame! Shame! Shame! *Ding Ding!*.
Psst…Rouge should be rogue
Love y’all!
I think the Twitter thing is a perfect example of why Trump or any President should not have a Twitter account.
Well Obama would tweet out links to sign up for Obamacare. It can serve a good purpose. But he had the sense to have some aide run it for him. The fact that Trump still runs his own account is a boon to those who oppose him. I mean, he makes a fool of himself on there, and when he doesn’t, he’s telegraphing his intentions and thoughts.
Am I the only one who hears “the President’s tweets” and immediately re-coil?
I may be old school, but I feel like Presidential Tweets should NOT be such a serious matter.
Prez tweets always made me think of WH Holiday cards, or a public congratulation to a Superbowl winner or a Happy B-day to the oldest person in the US. Not a national security issue. It blows my mind.
But, with Trump, twitter is a reality show, catfight free-for-all. It is shredding any last ounce of ingrained respect I have for the office, or politicians in general. It’s mind numbing.
On twitter, Grace you can’t childsecure the whole world
I’m sorry but the people speaking out about sexual harassment NOW are not “brave” or “heroes”, don’t get me wrong it’s good that they come out with the facts.
But I’d rather hear from people who STOOD up for themselves and risked being fired or got fired from a job because they did not accept the sexual harassment no matter who did it to them.
THESE are the real brave heroes that should have gotten spotlight the most.
But the people coming out now who didn’t make a stand when it happened made a conscious choice between not accept sexual harassment and perhaps lose their job in the process OR the job/money/fame was more important and then they accepted the sexual harassment, are not heroes.
Heroes are the brave people who do something even when there is a chance that they might get hurt.
So please stop squashing/tearing out the words “heroes” and “brave” as they soon mean nothing at all today anymore when everyone is a hero for sacrificing nothing.
So it’s good that they are coming out with more evidence against these sexual predators, but brave and heroes they are not cause it’s safe to come out now and they already got payed/fame.
see:Julianna Margulies/H. Weinstein story. I do think Hero and Brave are overused, but emboldened works for me, and it is about time:)
Sure, you can embolden people when they bring their story out into the light but at the same time not give them a false hero or brave title as they are reserved for people risking real harmful consequences doing something when it is not safe to do so.
yes!
I was super disappointed with the reactions on the Caitlyn Jenner story, that statement was horrible…it just basically said oh everyone’s so sensitive these days.
referring to the restaurant’s statement
Thank you Shadow! It’s nice to know some of you get it.
Ben was right, the problem wasn’t twitter, and I absolutely support the one free moment an employee has to give their last fuck you to their evil employer, the problem is Trump. When you take on a position of power you give up a lot of the freedom that you have to live like a regular person, if he’s so immature that he’s using social media to announce policy then he probably should be banned from twitter if it’s such a national security danger.
Who would have thought Hollywood was a cesspool of abuse and misconduct that only every film about Hollywood talked about?
This very strict sign-off of the show exactly on the hour (for the radio audience, I presume) is ruining the second half, in my opinion.
It almost always ends up with too many segments getting squeezed in, an effect which causes more than a few stories to not receive a proper discussion, and then a rush to wrap it up and end the show, often abruptly.
It feels that way to me, anyway.
They have to sign off on time because they are simulcasting on sattellite radio. They need to close with some sort of decorum and not just run out the clock and get cut off in the middle of a word.
Yes, I already acknowledged the radio audience as the impetus.
It’s ruining the second half of the show.
Regarding Kevin Spacey, and other similar folks:
This stuff happens, and it should not be tolerated. It happens in the education world between University/College staff, and students. It happens in Theater. It happens in digital entertainment. Everywhere.
Props to those who speak up. Those who can’t speak, talk to someone you trust to get it off your chest. Don’t let those secrets fester. It’s not your fault.
Looks like everyone needs a lesson in Power, Sexual Control, Professionalism, and empowerment of people entering any industry.
Also, underage predatory behavior needs to immediately be shut down – especially when a reasonable pattern exists with the accused person.
Peace and Love (quoting Ringo Starr),
JimmyM.C,
Love to Corey Haim (RIP), Corey Feldman, and all those through the years who has experienced this.
Peace to you too JimmyMC:)….and to ALL the predators who use HUMANS like Kleenex may you FOREVER look over your shoulder in fear!
twitter is a non government patform that the president chose to use. it is not the same level of security as government communications nor should it be. the problem here is that he is using it all the damn time, and twitter should not be burdened with the cost of additional protections unless the taxpayer foots the bill and there is a formal contract with the government to do so.
In light of Murder with Friends: Case-y Gracie?
Pastey Grace seems mean but pale, she is.
How about the royal: Her Grace?
Again very well said and I agree. one thing that stuck me is that they choose the two most triumphant images of Bruce and Caitlin to display. celebrating both and the historical accomplishments of both. one does not erase or deny the accomplishments of the other. both deserve to be acknowledged and respected for their accomplishment and what they both overcame at various times. i certainly could never be a decathlon winner or a vogue cover model and respect both immensely…still should have asked for permission before using another persons image however public a persona that person is, but that’s just my personal opinion on ‘public domain images’ it’s still a picture of a real person with real feelings that deserved the respect of being asked before being having their image publically displayed.
Chippy as a nickname could actually be pretty good! I seem to recall Ana and others commenting on how Grace always seems to brighten their day, and that she’s (at least outwardly) fairly ‘chipper’, if you will. And who can’t relate to a chip habit – it’s a possible cute inside-TYT joke/nickname.
Actual issue commentary/input: Although cries lamenting “political correctness” are too often misused, and/or used as a defense for simply being racist/bigoted/transphobic etc., my reaction to statement from the restaurant was that it sounds as though they genuinely want to enable discussion and have these thought-provoking moments in society/their community. It would have been cooler if they took the extra step to have trans-community approved pamphlets or some other way to obviously steer people towards love, acceptance, and education, but I (an admittedly cisgender woman of colour) didn’t immediately hate the boy/girl bathroom labels that seemed to acknowledge, accept, normalize and celebrate both past Olympian and current glamor magazine cover model Caitlyn.
would it be possible to put marks on the video to indicate when a particular news piece starts?
yes please and could the description not include two stories they didn’t get to and therefore aren’t in the video?
What’s the name of the song being played at the very beginning of the video?
Okay everyone, I gotta contradict what Ben says about the TYT-shirts. The quality of the shirts is AMAZING! They are suuuuuuper soft, high quality t-shirts, not the crappy Hanes 3-packs. I’m guessing they used to be that way, but I wouldn’t know, I’ve only been a member since the end of January, and I got my first few shirts from TYT between then and March, so maybe before that they were the cheap tees. Now they are the soft, high quality shirts you’d expect to get when you order premium tees from online boutiques. Also, the fabric is TOO STRONG!!
Muahaha! I do like the “Angel of Death”. Azrael doesn’t seem like a cool nickname though lol.
I think that the two bathroom signs/pictures looked like a celebration. They didn’t look offensive to me. It depends on the intent at the end of the day. I hope that it came from a good place.
Well said, I agree. Thank You.
It’s Texas and I live here and I’m TG and can tell you it did NOT “come from a good place”!.
OK the bathroom door photos…so many thoughts. I’ll say that I’m a lesbian who does struggle with gender identity, and in the past unrelated to that has and continues to struggle with issues of depression, panic disorder, self harm, suicide, and D.I.D. and when I saw these doors I thought it was a pro-transgender statement.
I saw it as supportive, and yes cashing in someone else’s celebrity. but I don’t understand the statement saying ‘it’s cruel’ to show someone a pre-transition image of themselves. it’s not a faked image, and I don’t see it as mocking or a making joke in anyway.
I can understand how for some people seeing pre-transition images of themselves reminds them of hurtful and difficult times, but I can say the same about pictures of my childhood, that doesn’t mean it’s cruel when someone breaks out the family photo album. your past is your past and that will never change. at some point you have to make peace with not just who you are now but who you were before and that is not limited to transgender people.
maybe I’ll just never understand americans (i’m canadian) but my first thought was that this was supportive message meant to say ‘hey use whatever bathroom your comfortable in’ I don’t see where the supposed disrespect is coming from other than using a picture of someone, anyone, famous or not, without that persons direct permission. that is the only fault I could give this restaurant, but if I lived in that town I would definitely eat there.
Hey there. I’m also Canadian, and part of the LGBTQ+ community. I’m not trans, but have the pleasure of knowing several in various stages of their path. I’ll share what I’ve learned. Each person reacts different, but the general rule is to never use their “dead-name” or use their “dead-image”. Because as they see it, that person is dead and the person they become is all that exists. Many leave their entire family in the past because of it.
hello, couple things LadyWolfheart, first off best name ever. second can you please introduce me to the LGBTQ+ community in Canada? as where i live (Hamilton) currently does not have one bar i can safely walk into that i know of. and I’ve never had even one LGBTQ+ friend in my life. i understand the concept of having a dead self. i changed my name in high school and later cut off all my family and few friends as well. and ya that sucks and it hurts, more people than just me. i have sisters i wish i could have a relationship with but can’t because of family issues. i understand fully that it can be hard to face your past or past self, but no name change or cutting off relationships erases the past. i respect the decisions as I’ve made them myself and it’s hard to do and hard to maintain. and i still cry over missing people i can’t talk to anymore because they don’t accept me. and wont allow the few that do to be in contact with me without making their lives hell. I’ve often though of doing a second name change and moving far away where i can be anyone i decide to be. but i’ll still be me and i’ll still remember my past even if I deny it and live a completely new life. the pain doesn’t go away with a new name or distance. maybe i’m too much of a realist but for my two cents running and hiding from my past and past self only continues to give it power over my current life. denying my past self and life is only to deny the place i came from, which for better or worse makes me the imperfect person i am today. however lonely that person is. said with all respect intended.
I am not part of the LGBTQ+ community other than as a supportive person (with friends and family in the community). I am super conflicted about the bathroom doors. I know that the trans community does not want their past identity brought into the present. In that way, I get that this would be deemed offensive and hurtful. I also looked at these pictures and thought they were both very celebratory of who Bruce was and Caitlin is. I would never suggest that something be done like this to anyone, but there is also the plain truth that Caitlin is now a public figure primarily because Bruce is a public figure from a historical standpoint. Bruce has not been wiped from history because Caitlin is here now. The picture that was used was the one that he became famous for. Totally trying to be understanding, but also truthful, I think this is done respectfully.
I also believe the company’s statement that these are issues that need to be discussed, not avoided in order not to hurt others’ feelings. If there aren’t open and honest discussions, how are we going to understand how someone else feels or what they are going through. I think the company’s heart was in the right place when they did this. I do believe that they do welcome everyone to their establishment. If you look at it one way, they are saying “up yours” to those who think that only biologic females belong in the women’s room. They are saying that those who identify as female go through this door and those who identify as male go through that door. These are my opinions and thoughts – again, I am not personally LGBTQ+, but am an ardent supporter.
Again very well said and I agree. one thing that stuck me is that they choose the two most triumphant images of Bruce and Caitlin to display. celebrating both and the historical accomplishments of both. one does not erase or deny the accomplishments of the other. both deserve to be acknowledged and respected for their accomplishment and what they both overcame at various times. i certainly could never be a decathlon winner or a vague cover model and respect both immensely…still should have asked for permission before using another persons image however public a persona that person is, but that’s just my personal opinion on ‘public domain images’ it’s still a picture of a real person with real feelings that deserved the respect of being asked before being having their image publically displayed.