Letterman segment

[Melissa A.]

Has Everybody seen this?

http://glaadblog.org/2010/01/06/late-show-with-david-letterman-contributes-to-problematic-reporting-on-amanda-simpson/


Yes, the Letterman segment was reminiscent of "The Crying Game", but also many other portrayals of transgender interaction in popular culture. the end of "Ace Ventura-Pet Detective" being one. The problem is that this reaction-horror and shock at finding one is transgender, and more specifically, a trans woman, is so practiced, to be formulaic, and one could say, all too common. So I can't give Letterman a pass for the use of a clever parody. I'm not without a sense of humor, but there is funny and then there is insulting and dangerous. Any member of any minority group could tell you that. Perpetuating a stereotype that says that that reaction is ok, and is one that, I believe, results in so many of us being assaulted or murdered with sad regularity is not something that needs to be accepted, in order to respect the right to parody. It needs to be changed, publicly shamed, and criticized until it's no longer socially acceptable.


Hugs,

Melissa:)

[Sally2005]

Thank you for sharing the video, I wanted to see what all the fuss was about. You have to know that the Alan Kalter skits are always way over exagerated and are intended to poke fun at the people who overreact about such news. Basically, they are showing people how silly it is to react the way he does. So, I don't see a major problem with it and I don't find Kalter's skits very funny in general, but there will be some media follow-up which should help to educate the masses, so that is good. It will be interesting to see how Letterman responds.

[RADER]

You know; I never cared much for Letterman. You just gave me another
reason to not watch his show. Besides, he comes on late and I need
my beauty sleep.:) Rader

[Emme]

http://firedavidletterman.com/

Lets do it!

[NathalieX66]

Maybe I'm, on the lower end of the totem pole here, you know, being a simple crossdresser, but it seems to me that any publicity, even bad publicity, is good publicity.

Most of the public is so unfamiliar with transgendered people, that it only seems natural that transphobia would find it's way into the psyche of the mainstream....it's just human nature. The only thing that will help is constant exposure within the mainstream at the ground level, not banning or boycotting.

[kellycan27]

I didn't think it bad at all, I certainly don't believe that it portrays us as someone that another would want to assault or kill, or in any way sheds a negative light on us.

[DonnaLynn77]

Hmmm... I think that it seemed more like the audience was laughing *at* Kalter, not with him. Dave actually says something like "Paul, will you go talk to him?" as in, "go set him straight, that is not cool" or the like. I've been watching Dave for years and don't think he would endorse comedy that promotes hate or discrimination. At least not knowingly anyway.

[Melissa A.]

I did struggle with this a little before I posted, and before I wrote CBS. I dissagree with the publicity for publicity's sake angle, as I don't particularly believe that any notoriety is good.(ask Tiger Woods or Bernie Madoff). Unless one has been living under a rock for the last 20 years, knowledege of the existence of transsexuals is pretty common, and we are well past the stage where we should be happy with any exposure, even if it's mocking, or in a bad light.

Humor, and especially parody, is somehow different. I do try not to be too serious, or sensitive. Being able to laugh at oneself is very important, and as I watched the segment, several times, I asked myself if my initial reaction, which would not go away, was too serious. My conclusion is still no, it is not. First of all, I don't think the "shock and horror" angle is all that sophisticated or layered in subtlety, or very funny, as it is hardly new when it comes to trans women, or homosexuals. And even if the intent was to mock the reaction, I honestly don't believe that is what most of the audience found amusing. In the long run, it's the reaction of the audience that counts. I still think that it's not a huge leap from that, to shock and horror that leads to violence for some, because it's ok to feel that way. Ms. Simpson is obviously not hiding the fact that she is trans, in any way. So the "reaction" in the segment felt forced and phony to me, and reinforces a general belief, in many popular culture dramatizations of transexual women, that deception is a part of our M.O. It doesn't take alot, in that kind of culture for some more bigoted members of that culture to feel that their issues and discomfort with this kind of "deception" deserves some kind of retribution. Violence and discrimination are real, and tragic. Broken bones, crushed skulls, and families dealing with the grief of a murdered loved one are a sad reality, still, for many of us. And that's my problem with it-Most other minority groups in this country do not have to still think about safety while out in the world the way that transsexuals still do. Until that fear becomes a thing of the past in a definite and quantifiable way, I think this kind reaction presented as humor is still inapropriate.

Hugs,

Melissa:)

[Sally24]

I didn't find it particularly funny but thought that the whole joke depended on her appearing as an attractive woman. How bad can it be when they are talking about a transgendered woman like you would obviously want to date her?

[Teri Jean]

I for one have a real problem with the individual and not the program, As for the segment of the appointment of Ms. Simpson I do think it is good to see the good ol' boys are on their way out.

Sally I'm not quite sure as how to percieve the comment about dating so let me say yes I would. I hope that people realize there is going to be those who will poke fun , at the expense of others, for the sake of a 5 second joke and those who are malicious and hurtful. Sometimes it is hard to tell which is which.

Teri

[Katesback]

I do not watch television. I have to many thing going on in my life to watch the stuff. I have felt it was a waste and from what you talk about it kind of reinforces what I have felt.

Want to improve your life then get rid of the television and go do something!

KAtie

[marisa]

i'm with donnalynn77 about this. personaly i think kalter just made an a$$ out of his self by that reaction. dave's reaction was almost that of shock. between the what was that all about look on his face, the comment of "odd" and telling paul to go talk with him. i watch dave fairly often and i have noticed that pretty much everyone or everything is fair game for a few pot shots.

[Diane Elizabeth]

The reaction, though played for being over the top humor, IMO, was received as being very negative for our community. Now someone that hasn't met any TGs before and saw this will most likely react in an accepting way .....
right!. I don't care for Letterman and I definitely didn't care for this "humor".

[stacie]

Hey Lenny Bruce,"should we censor what comedians say"?

[Kaitlyn Michele]

This seems like a very gray area to me...

I don't think being outraged is going to help.
People call it "selective" outrage...where were you when my group was the butt of the joke???

And like it or not, part of being a public figure is sometimes being teased, mocked etc.....

the problem is that melissa's point is very true...the joke is a totally lame stereotype that we see in the media all the time

and its a stereotype that dehumanizes us and puts us at risk in many ways..

I think they'll probably apologize and i just hope that it doesnt have the opposite effect intended, having a network apologize for a joke or offensive remark is such a pyrrhic victory for us...i dont think it helps us in the long run.
its hearts and minds we should be after

i dont beleive the answer is to demand apologies ...

i think the answer is to one by one, person by person, humanize our lives for people so they can understand that the joke is flat, and that the stereotype is not just wrong, its dangerous to us...

[Lorileah]

To answer Stacie's question, when on public airwaves where you don't control who can and will see the show, the answer is already yes. This isn't cable (which by the way I watched Comedy Channel last night and about 10% of what Ron White said was bleeped...and it is a comedy channel) or pay per view. Let me ask Stacie a question. If this was a racist joke about Mr Obama or Tiger Woods or even any person of color, does that make it OK to put out there? What if it was a religious joke about Christians? What if it was a joke about where you grew up and how "intelligent" you may not be? The joke in this case wasn't even about her being a post-op TS. It was about the insinuation that the announcer was somehow duped into what he perceived as a homosexual act. I think that most the TS's here would agree that after surgery they are in fact women (seems there was a thread about telling or not here) and should they have to come "clean" with a potential partner? Comedy does not give you a pass on free speech when you use it to defame or deride someone.

Now as to Mr Letterman's "reaction" they rehearsed this at least once so the "surprise and confusion" you saw in his face was just good acting. Unlike the slapstick over the top acting of the announcer.

Ms Simpson has to live with the innuendos and whispers daily. She has worked hard to be where she is and she deserves the chance to show that she is the correct person for the job, just like any other person. IF she had seduced someone prior and somehow had hidden her gender identity and somehow went against the other person's morals or beliefs, then the joke might have been warranted. In this case, she did nothing that would or should subject her to being the object of derision and embarrassment that the "joke" inflicted upon her. To her credit, she hasn't said anything about it. I'll say it again, she is one strong woman and I think she will be a great person for her position, and she is already a proud icon for the transsexual community.

[Kaitlyn Michele]

That is a good point Lorileah

joking about a transgender person should be ok, jokes are jokes...but hurtful attacks like racial jokes are just not appropriate, and this was a hurtful joke

I feel we are in a catch 22 because people are not going be sympathetic until they somehow understand why this kind of joke is dangerous

most peoples reaction is what's the big deal...

i have already had 2 people offline ask me if they saw this "hilarious" clip and that they hoped that I "would not be offended"...I said I had seen it and talked to them about how the joke itself is dehumanizing to T people and it creates hostility towards us...it creates shame and guilt in many of us, and causes some of us to choose horrible alternatives ..they were surprised and said they never thought of it that way..

and these people are very supportive and friendly to me..so that's a best case scenario...its a problem

[MissAmy]

Maybe I'm, on the lower end of the totem pole here, you know, being a simple crossdresser, but it seems to me that any publicity, even bad publicity, is good publicity.
Indeed, Married with Children didn't get good ratings until they had a episode where Al goes to a lingerie store to buy Peggy a special bra that most stores didn't carry. Some woman got really offended (there was TG jokes in the episode) and started to boycott the show and got all sorts of attention. Then people noticed the show, found out how great it was, and then it lasted for a long time.

I frankly don't care about this joke. I think it pokes more fun at the homophobic guys who accidentally discover that they like TGs and can't handle it.

Also since Leno left, Letterman is the number 1 show for late night I believe. So trying to get him fired would be like trying to bring democracy to Cuba. Ain't going to happen.

[GypsyKaren]

I thought Dave was too busy chasing after his young staff members to come up with any jokes.

KS :g1:

[Joy Carter]

Should stick to poking fun of Christians, Republicans and Rednecks. It's safer. :brolleyes:

BTW: She's an attractive lady that new appointee.

[stacie]

I am post op, have been since this past July.

The roll of a comedian is to make the audience laugh, at a minimum of once every fifteen seconds.......Lenny Bruce.

[Melissa A.]

Thanks so much for your insights, everybody.

Another video related to the appointment(I LOVE Ms. Maddow!)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbISiouROQk

Hugs,

Melissa:)

[CutieJulie]

lol i thought it was funny, besides they didn't say anything bad or that wasn't true. and i agree i think it was more of them laughing at his over reaction.

also i look at it this way the more we are in the media, the more people get desensitized and the more we become just another group that is accepted

[Melissa A.]

lol i thought it was funny, besides they didn't say anything bad or that wasn't true. and i agree i think it was more of them laughing at his over reaction.

also i look at it this way the more we are in the media, the more people get desensitized and the more we become just another group that is accepted

Ah. I get it now. Being portrayed as nothing but sex-workers on TV cop shows and deceptive tarts in film is a GOOD thing.... :doh: wonder why I didn't think of that? No one's gonna come to any misinformed or ignorant conclusions over THAT. Thanks. You have enlightened me.

Desnsitivity probably is a result, and that's what scares me, sometimes.

Hugs,

Melissa:)

[CutieJulie]

Ah. I get it now. Being portrayed as nothing but sex-workers on TV cop shows and deceptive tarts in film is a GOOD thing.... :doh: wonder why I didn't think of that? No one's gonna come to any misinformed or ignorant conclusions over THAT.

from what i saw we were being portrayed as someone who was hand picked by the president of the united states...

[Melissa A.]

Really? When did the president yell, "She used to be a guy??!!??" and run away screaming in horror?

Hugs,

Melissa:)

[abigailf]

So here is my take on this.

First off, Letterman referred to Amanda as a her and not a he. That showed respect.

Second, the way I took Alan Kalter’s reaction was (in the words of Clinton) he must have had sexual relations with that woman and only now learned that she used to be a dude.

I laughed at the skit.

It is not unlike racial humor, maybe it was misplaced on late night, but I don't see it as putting transgender people in a bad light.

And I agree with Nathalie, any publicity is good publicity. It raises public awareness. If someone is going to become biased from that skit, then they most likely are narrow minded people already. Reasonable people can see past the any unintended hate that was in the skit.

[Melissa A.]

I can see the validity in feeling that we should all chill out and not take this too seriously, I really can. A small part of me feels that way, myelf. But I must be missing something. Since when is "any" publlicity good? Sorry, but thats a really short-sighted viewpoint, in my opinion. There IS bad publicity, and I find it hard to believe that demeaning someone "raises awareness" of anything. Maybe there was some humor in it, but I don't think it enlightened anyone. Besides, trans people aren't new. Not at all. Most everyone knows we exist. We really are past that point, aren't we?

Hugs,

Melissa

[Hope]

Second, the way I took Alan Kalter’s reaction was (in the words of Clinton) he must have had sexual relations with that woman and only now learned that she used to be a dude.

Yeah. That is the problem. "I had sex with her, it was fun, she was nice, but I just found out that she used to have a penis, so now I must go vomit and hyperventilate for a bit." That would certainly fill me with warm fuzzes if I were the woman (or a member of the community) in question.

Clearly this is not good publicity.

[Kaitlyn Michele]

I can see the validity in feeling that we should all chill out and not take this too seriously, I really can. A small part of me feels that way, myelf. But I must be missing something. Since when is "any" publlicity good? Sorry, but thats a really short-sighted viewpoint, in my opinion. There IS bad publicity, and I find it hard to believe that demeaning someone "raises awareness" of anything. Maybe there was some humor in it, but I don't think it enlightened anyone. Besides, trans people aren't new. Not at all. Most everyone knows we exist. We really are past that point, aren't we?

Hugs,

Melissa

Hi Melissa...i would say that you could consider the realities of bringing our "offendedness --heh" to a high level..

i don't feel it gets us anything other than being viewed more harshly..and directly to one of your points...we are obviously NOT past this point...and thats the problem...if we were past it, we could take the joke.
look what happened to IMUS when he was cruel to those african american girls...it was commonly felt that he was wrong ...in our case, we are not there yet..

on the publicity point,
i couldnt disagree more with any publicity is a bad thing...this pub is bad..
Bad publicity only hurts those trading off of it...if Ms Simpson wass writing a book, the pub mightbe ok but just for her...not for us...
but she is not trading off her publicity, she is a high ranking gov't official.

but if our reaction is freaking out and demanding apologies then i'm not sure we really gain anything..

i'm not saying our righteous indignation doesnt matter...i'm saying that IMHO its better channeled into talking to our friends and people that have seen it, and illustrating just how problematic the stereotype is...

so far every single person that brought this joke up to me (4 people so far) did it innocently and felt it was funny.... after talking to them..every one said they had never thought of it "my way"....none of them were aware of the advocacy groups that have complained...because no one outside of our community gives a poop..but they do care about me (and by extension you) and hopefully will really think differently going forward..

I'm especially interested in your views Mel because my best girl friend here in town totally DISAGREES with me....LOL

[sempervirens]

I think GLAAD pretty well nailed it: the problem is that the reaction happens in IRL and has been accompanied by violence. Promulgating a view (reaction) or laughing at a circumstance that has lead others to be abused or murdered is over the line.

It's unlikely that it was in itself that harmful. The problem is that people think it's funny, and that this bit is indicative of where we're at with these issues in our society. My two cents, anyway.

[Melissa A.]

Maybe my hoping that we are past the point of wanting any kind of exposure, just to let people know we're out there, and not monsters, is wishful thinking on my part. But I still think being portrayed badly is being portrayed badly. And it doesn't help anyone. I suppose it's a double edged-sword, Kate. If things were such that I could take this particular joke without being bothered at all, or even laugh along, We would be in a place where we are not, yet. And if we were there, as a society and as a group, together, that kind of humor wouldn't ever happen, or appear funny to some people.

I will say that my indignation is rooted in the result of such mindsets and behaviors that end up with all of us facing the risk of being in harms way. I'm sorry some of you don't see that connection, but I think it's plain as day. We don't have a Day of remembrence every year for nothing, and those sad numbers aren't going down.

I really don't like coming off as angry or humorless. I'm not. Really. And anyone who knows me personally knows I let alot of stuff go, on a day-to-day basis. But I see this as a safety-related issue, not to mention a continuation of a view that is getting oild and tired, to me. That, I'm sorry, but I take seriously.

But you are right. Jumping up and down and demanding apologies isn't productive, nor good for anyone's image. Living our lives as happy, caring, intelligent citizens is slower, but alot more effective.

I also have a best friend here, who disagrees with me on alot of social and trans issues, when she gives a hoot, Kate!(and she's trans!) And I always look forward to your take on things like this. :)

Hugs,

Melissa:)

[melimelo]

so far every single person that brought this joke up to me (4 people so far) did it innocently and felt it was funny.... after talking to them..every one said they had never thought of it "my way"....none of them were aware of the advocacy groups that have complained...because no one outside of our community gives a poop..but they do care about me (and by extension you) and hopefully will really think differently going forward...

That's, IMHO, the best comment in this whole thread. I agree with you, Kaitlyn, that public apologies could sometimes do more damage than the joke itself, creating resentment about some purported TG lobby. But, sharing with the people in our life how this joke hurts us is probably the most constructive reaction I can think of. :thumbsup:

Cheers,

[kellycan27]

It's unlikely that it was in itself that harmful. The problem is that people think it's funny, and that this bit is indicative of where we're at with these issues in our society. My two cents, anyway.

Can you honestly say that you have never laughed at a joke that was was made at another person's expense? Can can any of you? But being that it was a transsexual... all of a sudden the world is going crash down on our heads. Did any of you notice any laughter or booing when Letterman announced that Amanda had been appointed to her job by the President of the United States? Seems to me that if people had an issue with TS people that there would have been more of a negative reaction from those same people who laughed at a dumb joke. I tend to believe that I am a reasonable person like most. My reaction to the skit was to laugh, but that was the end of it. I didn't sit there and fume about at what cost to transsexuals, nor do I believe that any rational person would actually give it another thought? It was a joke and it was somewhat humorous..end of story. Amanda wasn't even the butt of the joke, it was the guy who ran from the set.
If any harm comes out of it, it will more likely be because the TS community (at least a small part of it) goes on a rant, and makes a lot more of it than there really was. The negative light will be on how thin skinned and unacceptable we are in the ability to laugh at our selves. Comedians make jokes about everybody and every walk of life.
If you want to go on a rant, do it about something that is important... discrimination in the workplace, health care for SO's, and things of this nature. Fight for something that has true meaning, not something that is total nonsense. Stop pissing and moaning amongst yourselves and DO SOMETHING! How are we going to be taken seriously if we cry about every little thing? You want equal rights? Maybe you just learned that you have the right to be made fun of, just like any other person on the planet. Get over it!

Did it ever occur to any of you that your whining overshadowed the really really important issue in that one of us was appointed to a job by the President?

[Melissa A.]

Can you honestly say that you have never laughed at a joke that was was made at another person's expense? Can can any of you? But being that it was a transsexual... all of a sudden the world is going crash down on our heads. Did any of you notice any laughter or booing when Letterman announced that Amanda had been appointed to her job by the President of the United States? Seems to me that if people had an issue with TS people that there would have been more of a negative reaction from those same people who laughed at a dumb joke. I tend to believe that I am a reasonable person like most. My reaction to the skit was to laugh, but that was the end of it. I didn't sit there and fume about at what cost to transsexuals, nor do I believe that any rational person would actually give it another thought? It was a joke and it was somewhat humorous..end of story. Amanda wasn't even the butt of the joke, it was the guy who ran from the set.
If any harm comes out of it, it will more likely be because the TS community (at least a small part of it) goes on a rant, and makes a lot more of it than there really was. The negative light will be on how thin skinned and unacceptable we are in the ability to laugh at our selves. Comedians make jokes about everybody and every walk of life.
If you want to go on a rant, do it about something that is important... discrimination in the workplace, health care for SO's, and things of this nature. Fight for something that has true meaning, not something that is total nonsense. Stop pissing and moaning amongst yourselves and DO SOMETHING! How are we going to be taken seriously if we cry about every little thing? You want equal rights? Maybe you just learned that you have the right to be made fun of, just like any other person on the planet. Get over it!

Did it ever occur to any of you that your whining overshadowed the really really important issue in that one of us was appointed to a job by the President?



Wow. That sure looks alot more like a "rant" than anything I've seen here. Did you even bother to read the even-tempered back and forth durring this mostly productive thread? The "pissing and moaning", as we tempered our comments with the thought that while many of us think the skit in question was poorly thought out and rude, that demanding apologies would probably be counter-productive? Is there a reason you completely ignore my, and others, most salient point-That there is a connection between trans-panic and violence? If you disagree with that, I beg to differ-

"Robinson said the punch line of the bit has "been used as a defense in nearly every hate crime perpetrated against transgender people that has come to trial." She cited two cases in which individuals suspected of murdering transgender people claimed they did so in a rage after learning about their victims' gender identity."

"Defense lawyers argued Zapata — who considered herself a girl since the age of 7 — tricked Andrade into thinking he was going to have sex with a female. When Andrade discovered Zapata was biologically male, he reacted without thinking and killed her, his defense team said.
an attorney for Allen Andrade, 32, said the case is about the woman's deception and Andrade's reaction to that deception"

Just a couple of examples, possibley evidence that the rest of us may not be paranoid and crazy, Kelly. But hey, if you dissagree, fine. More power to ya to do so. But maybe, just maybe, you could disscuss THAT, instead of characterizing myself and others as humorless, paranoid harpies. If you don't see that connection, as I already said before, well, ok.

I care about things that have "true meaning", more than I suspect you can ever begin to know. And I "DO SOMETHING" about it whenever I can. But hey, YOU say "it was a joke and it was somewhat humorous...end of story." How rude and silly of me. My humblest apologies for not stopping right there. After all, It's the "end of story", 'cause you say so. Who the hell am I to further question anything about it?

I get that he's a comedian. I get that with equality and acceptance comes the right to "be made fun of". But you're telling me that I have NO right to stand up and point out when someone, intentionally or not, crosses a line that could endanger myelf and my sisters, by perpetuating a dangerous stereotype??? I throw the B.S. flag on that one. I wasnt hysterical. And there are ways to point out the connection between what he did and violence, without overeacting. We discussed that. Repeatedly. Were you even reading?

Hugs,

Melissa:)

P.S.- I think this is kinda funny. See? I don't piss and moan about everything-

http://contexts.org/socimages/2008/10/15/ikea-ad-trans-woman-in-a-messy-room/

[GypsyKaren]

Everyone's entitled to their own views, everyone's entitled to do what they want, I know that I've fought hard for the right to moan and groan about whatever I please, so let's save the soap box for laundry day.

Karen :g1:

[abigailf]

... Since when is "any" publlicity good? Sorry, but thats a really short-sighted viewpoint, in my opinion. ..


Well, let me put it this way. I, like many Americans, am not a news junky. If it had not been for the Letterman segment, I would not have known that Obama appointed a TG.

I know, I need to get out more...

[kristyk]

The one thing I noticed is the news media really kept it hush hush at least in my area of the country. I only heard about the trans person being appointed through this thread and then researching it online. I can't rememeber hearing about it anywhere else. I guess I have to wonder that not hearing anything is supposively a good thing in that we are being more and more excepted?

Kristy

[Melissa A.]

Yes. you're both right. As was pointed out in the Rachel Maddow clip I posted in this thread, there's already a female-to-male TG working in the Labor dept., and the only reason the NCTE issued a press release, is because She used be on the board, and they're proud of her. The appointment itself was done quietly, and without fanfare, and that's pretty cool.

Hugs,

Melissa:)

[lavistaa62]

I thought the observation that Ms. Simpson has worked very hard for her position is right on the dot- her position within the VERY conservative Raytheon corporation speaks volumes. They promote very few women in general and of course her TG status would be talked about and secretly held against her. This being the case I'm sure she's UBER competent- like 150% better than a white male would need to be in the same position. If they want to attack her competency, some idiosyncratic mannerism, hypocracy, etc I say fair play but to attack a woman because she doesn't fit some BS conception of beauty is to me just exactly the same as attacking someones race. Letterman was way over the line. If I ever watched him I'd care....

[kellycan27]

Andrade is a career criminal, and prone to violence, and try as he might his "snapped" defence proved to be fruitless. He was convicted and sentenced to life for 1st degree murder plus an extra 60 years for hate crimes. It is a defence attorney's duty to try and shed a negative light on the victim of a crime in an effort to make the perpetrator of the crime seem less or not culpable of the crime that he is accused of. The sad truth is that there are people like Andrade out there and no amount of legislation or censorship is going to deter them from breaking the law. Luckily these type people are the exception and not the rule. I am pretty sure that Andrade was well aware of the fact that there would be consequences for his crime,(as do most criminals). yet it didn't stop him. I also believe that I am safe in saying that the majority of people who abide by laws against violence would do so whether there was a law against it or not.... I did say the majority.
If laws and legislation do not serve as a deterrent to these types what do we honestly expect to gain by protesting a "skit" whether it by calm discussion or vehement revulsion?
IMHO you might better serve your sisters by educating them to the fact that there is inherent danger in what we do, and as unfortunate as it may be, it is up to us to try and make wise choices about where we go, what we do and who we do it with. Will it end the violence? NO, but it may reduce their chance of falling victim. Laws against muder,rape, robbery and assault have been on the books for years, and may serve a deterent to some, but we still see these type crimes perpetrated every day and it happens to ALL kinds of people... we are not special or exclusive. Random acts of violence are going to happen, no matter what....it's just an unfortunate fact of life.

[kristyk]

Melissa I watched the clip with Rachel Maddows loved every min. of it is she on a national channel or where can I pick up her news casts any idea.
Kristy

[CharleneT]

This is a good thread. I missed the whole hullaBaLOO! Mostly it's baloney from the baloney man. David Letterman has been losing what little "rep" he had for years. I really have never found him that funny.

The joke/skit was in poor taste, and protesting it is a good thing to do. Unfortunately, from him, that is what you should expect - poor taste in jokes. Hence protesting him will not probably have any real affect. Well, it will in one way, it keeps David L. in the news. I have to agree that the important thing here is that our President appointed another TG individual. Likely there are others already in place and who may be living completely under the radar. I sure HOPE so !

I think one of the most interesting points here is whether "any publicity is good publicity". I've struggled with that idea many times in my life. It seems to work well for celeb's, but no so well at my level of living (I forgot to file the paper work and completely missed my 15 minutes of fame). Right now, from my perspective, there is publicity that is bad. Especially if it marginalize TG folks. In American society it seems like any particular group has to go thru some period of being made fun of, supposedly tongue in cheek, before you are completely accepted. But at the same time, only those who've fought back against that have ended up as accepted.

I wrote and complained to CBS about the skit, not that I believe they will pay much attention to my opinion. More importantly, I talk to my friends about it and -- if need be -- point out what's insulting in it.

[Starling]

I didn't know about Ms. Simpson's appointment until I saw that clip this afternoon, and I am a news junkie! I conclude, therefore, that most of Letterman's audience didn't know about her either. Dave's set-up was dignified, Ms. Simpson's picture was not "sexed-up," the audience did not hoot or whistle at her, and the butt of the joke was clearly Mr. Kalter. So the core effect of the joke was pro-TG, anti-prejudice.

The question of unintended side effects is more touchy. I tried imagining the joke with Ms. Simspon being a partially black person who had always been assumed to be totally-totally-totally, Ed Begley Jr., Jack Nicklaus, white. The outraged and disgusted racist would still be the butt of the joke. Perhaps, however, there would be less chance of misinterpretation; it has rightfully become a complete taboo to insinuate that race means anything essential about a person.

This is not yet true of the attitude toward TG people. While I believe the incidence of genuine TG-haters is small, the number of ordinary people who feel uncomfortable about us is fairly large, mainly because of the disproportionate importance our society lays on sex and gender, which comes from the very non-sexy matters of property inheritance within the system and ethos of patrimony. (What if there's no male heir? What if the Duke becomes a Duchess?)

Does laughing at Kalter relieve some of this discomfort, or increase it? I think that's an open question, and it depends on who's watching. Some will identify with his mortification, and others will be amused by his sexual immaturity. We cannot control how people will react to a joke.

Should we try? Well, it feels good, but it's like pushing a rope. Should we try to prevent such jokes in the first place? I think the best answer to speech we don't like is more speech. Ideally, the Letterman sketch would have immediately followed Rachel Maddow's. Then there would have been a fuller context for the gag. But I think Letterman assumes his audience is fairly bright, and his confidence was justified by their in-person response.

My personal reaction is that the joke is a tension-reducer, and that laughter--especially when accurately pointed--is a very potent tool for overcoming hatred and fear. Our common humanity, etc., ad infinitum.

For those who disagree, I think the most effective response is to inform people about the facts of transgender life. Many times I've had my heart opened by a book or film's powerful depiction of a life very different from my own.

It's exciting to imagine more films like Transamerica, or even the presence of three-dimensional TG characters in films that are not mainly about them. TG characters just living, breathing and going about their lives. And I think it will happen, just as it has already happened for gays and lesbians.

:) Lallie

[Emme]

I don't find Kalter's skits very funny

[Melissa A.]

Melissa I watched the clip with Rachel Maddows loved every min. of it is she on a national channel or where can I pick up her news casts any idea.
Kristy

Weeknights at 9pm(Eastern time) on MSNBC, Kristy.

Hugs,

Melissa:)

[Melissa A.]

Andrade is a career criminal, and prone to violence, and try as he might his "snapped" defence proved to be fruitless. He was convicted and sentenced to life for 1st degree murder plus an extra 60 years for hate crimes. It is a defence attorney's duty to try and shed a negative light on the victim of a crime in an effort to make the perpetrator of the crime seem less or not culpable of the crime that he is accused of. The sad truth is that there are people like Andrade out there and no amount of legislation or censorship is going to deter them from breaking the law. Luckily these type people are the exception and not the rule. I am pretty sure that Andrade was well aware of the fact that there would be consequences for his crime,(as do most criminals). yet it didn't stop him. I also believe that I am safe in saying that the majority of people who abide by laws against violence would do so whether there was a law against it or not.... I did say the majority.
If laws and legislation do not serve as a deterrent to these types what do we honestly expect to gain by protesting a "skit" whether it by calm discussion or vehement revulsion?
IMHO you might better serve your sisters by educating them to the fact that there is inherent danger in what we do, and as unfortunate as it may be, it is up to us to try and make wise choices about where we go, what we do and who we do it with. Will it end the violence? NO, but it may reduce their chance of falling victim. Laws against muder,rape, robbery and assault have been on the books for years, and may serve a deterent to some, but we still see these type crimes perpetrated every day and it happens to ALL kinds of people... we are not special or exclusive. Random acts of violence are going to happen, no matter what....it's just an unfortunate fact of life.

What is hoped to be gained, is slowly changing perception and tone, something that can and has been known to happen. The boys who murdered Gwen Aroujo weren't career criminals. She thought of them as friends. And they almost got away with a "panic" defense.(please, please, please.. don't go on about how screwed up she was, and all the bad choices she made. I know the story, I really do, and that's not the point, to me) These aren't, as you seem to think, always random acts of violence. And I really don't care, for the purposes of this discussion, what happened at trial. They happened for a reason. One of those reasons were because the victims were transgender. One other is those commiting them believed at the time that their actions were somehow justified. But I don't want to argue the minutae of very case of transgeder murder with you. I'm getting weary of explaining to you that there is a connection between joking about trans-panic, and a perception by some, even if it's in a moment of rage, that it's even minimally ok to feel that way. And you ignoring me. You disagree. I get it. You believe more responsible behavior on the victim's part would somehow prevent this kind of crime from ever happening, orlessen the chances of it happening. I get it. And you think there is absolutely no connection between what happens in popular culture and how people are treated in the world as a result. That either people are somewhat responsible for what happens to them, as victims, or that acts of violence against trans people are inevitable, and happen in some kind of socially-disconected vacuum. I get it. I've explained how I feel in every possible way I could. You won't, or can't see any validity in what it is I'm saying. Ok. I get it. I'm tired of trying to explain. Enough. Please.

Hugs,

Melissa:)

[Lorileah]

But I think Letterman assumes his audience is fairly bright, and his confidence was justified by their in-person response.



Not sure that I understand that. The audience was "bright" when they a) didn't make some sort of noise when Letterman started the joke (as Kelly pointed out) and mentioned Ms Simpson's name (they didn't make any noise when he mentioned the balloon boy's father either) and b) they laughed at the slapstick low humor of a man who was bigoted. Ok. Now I know that I am beyond most TV humor. Letterman did say something I found funny in that monologue but I can't remember it, so bad humor must go further than what I consider good humor. Go figure

On that same note, did anyone notice that the worst of the low blow, inane, inept, sophomoric comedy shows SNL made absolutely NO mention of the appointment. Fish in a barrel and the passed on it! Barkley was funny though, he is so not smooth :)

[kellycan27]

What is hoped to be gained, is slowly changing perception and tone, something that can and has been known to happen. The boys who murdered Gwen Aroujo weren't career criminals. She thought of them as friends. And they almost got away with a "panic" defense.(please, please, please.. don't go on about how screwed up she was, and all the bad choices she made. I know the story, I really do, and that's not the point, to me) These aren't, as you seem to think, always random acts of violence. And I really don't care, for the purposes of this discussion, what happened at trial. They happened for a reason. One of those reasons were because the victims were transgender. One other is those committing them believed at the time that their actions were somehow justified. But I don't want to argue the minutae of very case of transgender murder with you. I'm getting weary of explaining to you that there is a connection between joking about trans-panic, and a perception by some, even if it's in a moment of rage, that it's even minimally ok to feel that way. And you ignoring me. You disagree. I get it. You believe more responsible behavior on the victim's part would somehow prevent this kind of crime from ever happening, orlessen the chances of it happening. I get it. And you think there is absolutely no connection between what happens in popular culture and how people are treated in the world as a result. That either people are somewhat responsible for what happens to them, as victims, or that acts of violence against trans people are inevitable, and happen in some kind of socially-disconected vacuum. I get it. I've explained how I feel in every possible way I could. You won't, or can't see any validity in what it is I'm saying. Ok. I get it. I'm tired of trying to explain. Enough. Please.

Hugs,

Melissa:)

I never said that it was in any way the victims fault, I said that using common sense and being careful and watchful of our surroundings may lessen the chance of something happening.( because we are all aware of he fact that there are those who may do us harm) I also never said that violence against trans people was inevitable, I said violence happens everyday .. to all kinds of people. A fact which you seem to want to ignore, because it doesn't fit your agenda. Violence is perpetrated against blacks because they are black, and gays because they are gay, and yes against Trans people because they are trans people. And by the way... I don't call getting sentenced from 15 years to life.. almost getting away with it. If you don't want to go over these cases.. why site them to begin with? Again, the Trans-panic excuse did them no good. I am not ignoring the connection, what I said was that there are people out there that that commit these type of hate crimes, and your slow perception and tone IMHO are going to do little to deter them. That slow perception and tone, may help in regards to more reasonable people.. the ones are are not prone to violence. There is no rhythm or reason to violence, and haters need no justification to hate.

[Melissa A.]

I never said that it was in any way the victims fault, I said that using common sense and being careful and watchful of our surroundings may lessen the chance of something happening.( because we are all aware of he fact that there are those who may do us harm) I also never said that violence against trans people was inevitable, I said violence happens everyday .. to all kinds of people. A fact which you seem to want to ignore, because it doesn't fit your agenda. Violence is perpetrated against blacks because they are black, and gays because they are gay, and yes against Trans people because they are trans people. And by the way... I don't call getting sentenced from 15 years to life.. almost getting away with it. If you don't want to go over these cases.. why site them to begin with? Again, the Trans-panic excuse did them no good. I am not ignoring the connection, what I said was that there are people out there that that commit these type of hate crimes, and your slow perception and tone IMHO are going to do little to deter them. That slow perception and tone, may help in regards to more reasonable people.. the ones are are not prone to violence. There is no rhythm or reason to violence, and haters need no justification to hate.

The case in question took two trials to reach a verdict. How do ya think her mom felt, in the interim, knowing they just might get away with a far lesser charge? My point was it almost worked. And they weren't career criminals, just idiotic kids who somehow thought at the time they were justified in doing what they did. It doesnt take a criminal with a long record to commit this kind of a crime, then try to blame the victim.

I don't have any agenda. I just think the humor we were talking about isn't at all helpful, is part of the general culture, and that what people say, do, produce and air have consequences and sometimes help lead to terrible things happening. Not necessarilly by themselves, but as a general trend. And that it can be changed, by pointing out things that cross a line between just annoying and tasteless to possibley helping contribute to an atmophere where it seems ok to blame someone for your own issues. But you don't believe any of that is relevant, think I'm whining, see things as far less nuanced and much more black and white than I do, which is fine. I see things the way I do, and I don't suppose there's any chance you won't feel compelled to just have to say something more, and you'll just let this go. I'm really tired of repeating myself. you win, Ok? No mas. please stop. Let it go. Please. You win. I'm begging you.

Hugs,

Melissa:)

[Starling]

Not sure that I understand that. The audience was "bright" when they a) didn't make some sort of noise when Letterman started the joke (as Kelly pointed out) and mentioned Ms Simpson's name (they didn't make any noise when he mentioned the balloon boy's father either) and b) they laughed at the slapstick low humor of a man who was bigoted...

Hi Lori,

What I meant was that his studio audience didn't laugh at Ms. Simpson, or her TS status; they laughed at the bigotry of Kalter's character. I don't think it was a particularly good joke, but it was not a bigoted joke. To the contrary, in fact. So do we want to fire Letterman for airing pro-TS jokes?

And again, the way the joke is taken by bigots--prejudice confirmed--is not something anyone can control. Does this mean we ban all jokes? By all means, talk back to the media, but bring the positive not the negative message.

I don't watch SNL because, as you say, it is LCD junk. I don't really watch Letterman's show, either. It's TCM for me most of the time. LOL?

:) Lallie

[CharleneT]

Hi Lori,

What I meant was that his studio audience didn't laugh at Ms. Simpson, or her TS status; they laughed at the bigotry of Kalter's character. I don't think it was a particularly good joke, but it was not a bigoted joke. To the contrary, in fact. So do we want to fire Letterman for airing pro-TS jokes?

. . .

:) Lallie

I can't be sure of course, but it didn't look like they were playing this as a pro-TS joke. I think it was the opposite but played out in a way to leave you not knowing what actually was the point. ie, pointless shallow humor. That's Letterman's stock and trade these days.

The valuable thing here isn't the publicity, it was fairly negative. BUT it did get some people talking -- and hopefully learning a bit too.

[DonnaLynn77]

Of course, the right thing for Dave to do in this case is to have her on his show!

*That's* what we should be lobbying for!

[Tisha Ann Ryan]

Please celebrate the fact that Amanda has risen on ability not on sexual orientation to the Presidentially Appointed position. Celebrate the fact that before her, a lot of persons moved the resistance to acceptance to a point where this could happen. Those little steps taken by a lot of persons over time made this possible. Those little steps were done by average people writting letters of complaint to Letterman and the TV networks ... so please take a little step and let some one know your indignation.

Tisha

[Sweet Jane]

I've always said its only my behaviour that I have any real control over.

When I viewed the clip I thought at best it was 'insensitive' and at worst 'derisive' of a person who has proven workwise that she is perceived as the best person for the job by the president no less....I guess a show like Letterman thrives on easy laughs, and we'll always be an easy laugh target for people of his ilk

I guess her values and morals are a little higher than Letterman's though, otherwise she probably wouldn't have been appointed. I always feel so proud for a transgendered person when they succeed so publicly, and it makes me feel so much more 'mainstream'!

[helenr]

Dave Letterman would show some class if he invited Ms Simpson to come on his show to both discuss her important work and also to clarify, educate the viewers about who transgendered individuals and further education. couldn't hurt.

[kellycan27]

Dave Letterman would show some class if he invited Ms Simpson to come on his show to both discuss her important work and also to clarify, educate the viewers about who transgendered individuals and further education. couldn't hurt.

That would be great for us, but what makes you think that Ms Simpson would want to have her personal life drudged up in front of a couple million people? IMHO, she has already done us a great service by just being herself.

[ChanDelle]

I'm proud of Pres. Obama to have the guts to pick the right person, and I'm sure there was a lot of inside hand wringing over it. I'd love to know how it all went down from a "fly on the wall" viewpoint. I really didn't the the outtake was funny, nor do I think most of derission comedy particularly funny either, no matter who's ox is gored. I don't watch any of the late night talk shows except for Leno on occasion as I really don't find them entertaining, much less any intellectual content.

Thanks for the clip from Rachel who I think put it into the right context. She's a light at the end of a very long tunnel. IMHO!

I better get off my soapbox before I fall off and break a heel.

ChanDelle

[Lorileah]

personal life drudged up in front of a couple million people?

And it would be just that, unless she is put in charge of some major legislation. The guest are on there to promote themselves. Ms Simpson doesn't need that. Now if Letterman would have someone on to discuss Prop 8 or DADT, then I would be interested

[Starling]

Of course, the right thing for Dave to do in this case is to have her on his show!!...


...IMHO, she has already done us a great service by just being herself.


...Now if Letterman would have someone on to discuss Prop 8 or DADT, then I would be interested

I agree with all of you. It would be great to "meet" Ms. Simpson in the kind of forum that didn't exploit her private life for laughs or jollies, but rather focused on her work. In other words, her gender history would not be mentioned. (And I bet that will happen at some point.) I think she has a perfect right to save her personal story for her memoirs.

Lallie