Vanessa and I met Margaret Cho!
Samhita Mukhopadhyay, Margaret Cho and Vanessa Valenti at Radio City Music Hall.
So Vanessa and I had the pleasure of seeing Margaret Cho on her tour, "Beautiful," at Radio City Music Hall this past Saturday. It was amazing, as per usual. But what was even more amazing is we had back stage passes and were actually able to meet her as well. She said she, "reads us all the time." *dies*
And she did in fact have the whole crowd singing, "Eat me out," at the end of the show.
Thanks for keeping it real Margaret. Real raunchy!
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Vanessa and I met Margaret Cho!.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/9730
Did you talk to her about the sexist attack on Palin?
re: trouble's comment. yeah...that would have be awkward. meeting her that is, and hearing she reads this site all the time. not calling her out on palin.
*turns green with envy*
Cholicious!!!
Like my tweenage cousins say, OMG I am so jeal!!! I still crack up when I remember her bit about writing a "F--- You" petition to a woman who created a petition against her.
That song was awesome!
I was actually too star-struck to ask her anything. She did open set with, "I fucking hate Sarah Palin." I think I am blinded because I feel the same way. Especially after she basically incited a race riot today in Florida.
Oh, It was such an amazing show, I live in Sydney and Margaret, the wonderwoman that she is was awesome enough to open her worldwide tour in Sydney for the gay and lesbian Mardi Gras and also be cheif of Parade, which means I got to meet her at our media launch.
I have a smiliar photo of me and the Chomeister and I was equally starstruck, I felt so silly talking to her and thanking her for her humour helping me come otu of the closet.
Also, hello Feministers, i have been reading for about 6 months, and finally got the nerve to post.
*meek hello*
Oh, well as long as rape jokes are funny if we're starstruck, then nevermind holding anyone accountable for them.
Besides, can't we just take a joke? http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2008/09/cho-responds.html
After all, we all know how funny rape is if the joke is on a woman like Sarah Palin that no one likes.
Poorly played, Feministing, poorly played.
I had no idea she could sign ! That's hilarious.
Omg, fte77, there's a time and a place for such things. If it were an interview with her, yes, that would be an appropriate time. It would be so gauche to do that at first time meeting backstage. Also, she was starstruck. Sorry if we're not all perfect feminist robots like you, who would undoubtedly come up with a perfectly cited dissertation.
Omg, fte77, there's a time and a place for such things. If it were an interview with her, yes, that would be an appropriate time. It would be so gauche to do that at first time meeting backstage. Also, she was starstruck. Sorry if we're not all perfect feminist robots like you, who would undoubtedly come up with a perfectly cited dissertation.
That could have all been avoided by not going to see her in the first place, but HEY! Why take that simple step when you can go and be starstruck? I know, how totally robotic of me, to remember something vicious and hateful an entertainer has said (and then defended) and thus choose to avoid their output. It's, like, almost inhuman, this "memory" capability.
Where is the time and place, exactly? Is it here on Feministing? Because it was posted here. Is it in the comments, where Samhita or Vanessa could have addressed it? Because all I saw in the comments was Samhita mentioning how OMG, FAMOUS, I COULDN'T THINK and also, *I* hate Sarah Palin, so it was hard for me to take the brutal rape threats against her seriously which just insulted me more. Only an interview will do, hmm? Even though Cho made the comments in her blog and not an interview and even though she's apparently integrated hating Sarah Palin into her act?
I hate Sarah Palin's policies too. I think it's insulting she's being held up as a legitimate candidate. I campaign and will vote for Barack Obama. Just so my "cred" is out there. But I still think Cho's "humor" (haha, I want to rape Sarah Palin, she deserves it, isn't that HILARIOUS?) was disgusting and insulting and misogynistic and forgetting that because she's OMG FAMOUS or because we're "starstuck" or because she is oftentimes an ally is JUST AS BAD as never mentioning or being outraged at this at all. She was not only hateful, she refused to apologize for it and thus spread more hate. This makes her unwilling to learn from criticism and makes me unwilling to support her anymore.
And you can think that makes me as robotic or "unfun" as you want, but it's a point I thought needed to be addressed.
fte77.myopenid.com? People, humans, women are NOT PERFECT. Including Margaret Cho. Are you perfect? Probably not--that'd be damn impossible. I'm sure you've said things and done things that are not perfect. Because you're *gasp* human.
You do not have to agree with someone 100% to still respect and like them especially when the majority of their material is so wonderful.
And sorry, but I hate Sarah Palin, too. Not just her politics, but her as a woman, because her politics are part of who she is as a person. She's hateful, 100% of the time, toward women, gays, lesbians, and people in general. So sorry to say if I can't get all riled up when Margaret Cho says she hates her too.
No, I am not a robot or perfect. I am "just human" JUST LIKE MARGARET CHO. (now we can be besties!!!!1111)
However, I would like to think that when I make mistakes, when I say things that are hurtful or insulting, I can listen to the advice and counsel of my allies and friends when they point out why my comments or actions were hurtful and damaging. When I, mere human that I am, mess up, I try to learn from that.
The reason I posted the link to Shakesville in my first comment isn't because it discussed Cho's comment about rape, oh, the hilarity!!, we all knew about that charming comment since it was posted here, but because it highlighted Cho's REFUSAL to apologize for her hateful, harmful statements. It highlighted her INABILITY to LISTEN to criticism of her mistake.
So, I think that's worth commenting on and discussing. Why did Margaret Cho refuse to acknowledge that her comments were a mistake? Maybe because we, as her allies and "fans" (I am not now and never have been a fan of her comedy, so I am speaking about the general "you" here) keep going to her shows, taking pictures with her backstage, being starstruck, and saying, oh, well, we all make mistakes as humans, it's not like we need to do anything about them, she's cool!!!
I think the smart thing to have done would to not post this experience. Since this was a site that called MC out on her sexism, why then go back and say how much you love her (and spent the money to see her?) I agree that bringing it up at first meeting would be gauche, but I also am befuddled why there was a meeting in the first place. If you've got these kind of dissonant actions going on, just maybe not share them on the site.
Whoa!
MCho made NO rape joke, let alone a brutal rape joke. Please do not confuse people. MCHO NEVER SAID ANYTHING RAPE.
The complaint against her: MCHO said she'd never vote for Palin but is kind of obsessed with having (hot, consentual) sex with her, and goes on to talk about it in a humorous way. It clearly was a joke, which if made about a man would hit me about the same way. Crude? Yes. But MCho often is, and her unapologetic acknowledgment of her sexual desire, for men and women, is often considered refreshing.
While it was offensive, I would say that expecting a boycott or a complete reversal of opinion is way over the top.
And for the record, there are some candidates with whom I wouldn't mind a romp in the hay. This raised pulse is amplified, of-course, by their brains and policies... but I'm not going to dictate sexual desire, nor am I a comedienne- who is well-known for being crude.
There was some good to the joke- acknowledging sexual fantasy but separating that from abilities (there are some people who want to vote for Palin because she's pretty- I know some of them), and of-course- further normalizing lesbian desire.
Again, I'm not saying it's OK, but MCho likely believes she was acting in a perfectly feminist manner, and doesn't need to be told what to think or feel, let alone be confronted at her show or boycotted.
Woah, WOAH! Am I being yelled at on my own site? Excuse me...you don't have to agree with me, but you might want to check your tone.
People are complex, I do feel that Margaret Cho being one of the first Asian Americans in the media to unabashedly talk about race and gender and sexuality has made considerable contributions to popular culture. I don't support her in what she said about Palin, I thought it was problematic.
But I didn't feel that I needed to tell her that. Margaret Cho is not a frat boy, I believe she was kidding when she said that. I don't think it is funny, but I do believe she is smart enough and feminist enough to recognize she is making a fucked statement but is choosing to anyway. I guess I could have asked about that. She is also an extremely, extremely raunchy comic and not everything she says is PC. By any stretch of the imagination. She even had some racist shit to say about India. But I knew she was kidding because it was a comedy show.
But seriously, check your tone, not really sure what you think I am implicitly supporting by not confronting Cho, but you are terribly wrong.
I reread my post and realized it didn't fully acknowledge that MCho was offensive.
I guess I'm still torn about it, as a woman and a survivor, but also a woman who desires.
Also, I actually really dislike MCho, precisely because I find her crude. I know I tend to fall on the "prudish" side, and you'd be lucky to hear anything vulgar escape my lips. I will never attend her shows. However, I do try to be objective in my assessment of issues like these.
I don't condone objectification, but it makes more sense coming from a comedienne who is there to acknowledge our less acceptable sides- and has a reputation for being vulgar.
I apologize for talking so much about an old issue, and for having a knee-jerk reaction. Feel free to disregard. I have some thinking to do.
Oh, well, as long as you knew she was kidding then I guess it's funny. Why did you mention that Margaret Cho is not a frat boy? Does that mean it wouldn't be "OK" for a frat boy to say this but it is OK for Margaret Cho because she's a woman talking about a woman? Would it be OK for Dane Cook to say it? Or Chris Rock? Was it the bit and the language that was problematic or the person saying it? If it was the person, why can't we talk about that?
Sorry about my tone on YOUR SITE (silly me, I thought Feministing was a community, which is why I donated money and like to read the community pages, but I see how clearly that's pushed aside for YOUR SITE.) I thought this was a place we could discuss some problematic language from someone who claims to be an ally. Obviously, I was wrong, and just being too "PC" about the whole thing. Again, does "racist shit" not matter or not count if it's 1. in a comedy routine or 2. expressed by a member of a minority group?
Sorry, sorry! My audacity in asking all these questions in this tone and your site, where I expected some legitimate discussion of some problematic and offensive language against women is just really, really rude of me.
Please, don't let me harsh your starstruck-comedy-squee any longer! I apologize!
Hmm, why did I engage? You sound like a concern troll. Troll b-gone has been sprayed.
Sorry folks, but I will leave this comment up, just to show how sneaky they can be.
Dayumn, I go to work and I miss all this!
I think a lesson that can be learned from this is that popular culture is incredibly complicated at the best of times. As Margaret Cho is a feminist icon (say what you will about her comments and the uproar it got) one needs to realize that Margaret Cho= offensively raunchy and in my opinion hilarious humour.
I think the issue at hand is the fact it is difficult to separate Sarah Palin as a powerful fixture in American politics and Sarah Palin as a woman. Many feminists (from what I've seen/discussed with others) know that being sexist towards Palin is wrong based off of her gender, but that does not mean policies cannot be judged. Some people take it too far, as seen in the case of Margaret Cho and Sandra Bernhardt- but it does not mean that these women are bad- just made a poor decision because all human beings are flawed.
End rant
P.S. I've been dying to see her live. Congrats!
I am appalled to see fte77 banned as a "troll". Totally out of line. She had some excellent points to make and I don't think tone was ever disrespectful. I'm really, really bothered by Samhita's response here.
I think fte77 had good points, troll or not. Maybe too intense, but that's not an offense. I think a mistake was made there being no caveat in this post, and that other feministing editors aren't commenting. This is a complex enough issue that I've come back to read about it days later.
It's appalling to me that you banned fte77. It makes you look petty and immature and underlines your failure to respond to any of fte77's points.
Margaret Cho made a joke that was repulsive and offensive and, yes, incredibly sexist. When confronted about it she refused to apologize, or to even grasp the fact that hating Sarah Palin is NOT AN EXCUSE to make light of rape. Ever. Especially rape used as a weapon to silence women whom "we" do not like. It's awful, Cho's comments were awful, and your response here is awful.
While I am inclined to agree with the argument which recognizes that Margaret Cho is only human and that it is possible to admire and respect someone even while disagreeing with some things they may say or do, I am very disturbed with how dissent was treated in this discussion. I don't believe fte77 was inappropriate or trolling, but simply had a different perspective, which is supposed to be what this site is all about- feminists coming together to react to and analyze the world around us. We aren't expected to be a homogenous group with opinions indistinguishable from one another, but, like our ideals, diverse and open. Other than being perhaps a bit angry and sarcastic in her responses, I see nothing abnormal about fte77's behavior other than that she disagreed with a moderator.
To clarify, Cho wasn't the one to make an outright rape reference (at least, that I am aware of) - that was Sandra Bernhardt.
What Cho did do was talk about Palin in a very aggressive, sexual manner. Here's that myspace post for anyone needing a refresher.
In particular, it's her line about all Palin "needs" is a good fuck, doggy-style.
This celebratory post was just...confusing. Disappointing.
I, too, keep returning to check this because the lack of any editor reply, beyond the banning of fte77, is making my head spin.
I know the editors here at Feministing are not enemy, and are doing a lot of other good work. But more and more I find myself turning to spot-on sites like Melissa's posts at Shakesville and not reading Feministing each day, anymore. Too many inconsistencies, like the post above, and "Guilty Feminist Pleasures" type postings.
Make that "Guilty (Un) Feminist Pleasures" type postings...
And let me just add, I love Margaret Cho and you Samhita, I just didn't quite understand the need to ban anyone over this.
Ladies, someone already said it, but M. Cho did NOT make a rape joke. I really don't how to make it any clearer.
Also, she is a grown-ass woman. You may want her to apologize, it may make your heart smile, but she doesn't OWE anyone an apology. She's not a child and can't be punished for saying something naughty. Frankly, I'd prefer she stand behind what she says, it shows an intellectual honesty that most people lack when they say something unpleasant and are cowed to apologize.
WTF?????? seriously???
You know, it may seem harsh that I banned fte77, but it is something the editors discussed together. Something we rarely do. At this point, we have had such an influx of trolls, it is sometimes hard to decipher between a troll and just an overly rude commenter. Regardless, after thinking about it, I still decided that s/he should be banned.
You may not agree with my decision, but recognize that I thought about it. All of us at Feministing are doing what we can with the tools that we have.
You don't have to agree with every choice I make, every word I write and every person I ban. I felt that that this commenter was talking to me in a very rude and aggressive manner essentially questioning my ability to make a judgment and potentially putting my feminism to the test.
Frankly, the comments section is not to decide whether I am feminist enough or not. Hash out the issues, discuss what I am writing about, but don't point finger at me when you don't even know me. Basically, keep it civil...maybe even polite. It is possible and we have countless, countless, countless examples of commenters that disagree and dissent but do so in a polite manner that doesn't put the author down or question their credibility. As someone who has been constantly told because of race, class, ability and gender that the words I write are not legitimate, well yeah I am a little sensitive to self proclaimed feminists trying to call me out.
Frankly, you can do that somewhere else, but you don't need to do that here. I don't appreciate the insinuation that I am somehow supporting a sexist agenda. I ESPECIALLY didn't appreciate having it thrown in my face that when a POC says something racist is it "therefore not racist." Because actually it isn't, it IS different. And I also think it is different when comedians make racist and sexist jokes. It doesn't mean they aren't problematic, but it really is all about context. I didn't say it is OK for Margaret Cho to say what she said (and she did NOT make a rape joke, please reread the threads at Shakespeare's sister), but it IS different than if a frat boy said it. And perhaps me and other feminist bloggers disagree, I am OK with that. But, I don't see them here yelling at me or using aggressive and diminishing language with me.
So I guess saying trolling was wrong. I banned this person for being unnecessarily rude and condescending to me and I feel that was totally within my right. And please let's not forget, the writers at Feministing are in fact human.
No one is perfect. Not as people and not in their feminism. It is unfair to hold me to a standard that no one can reach. I put myself out there in a very public way very regularly. You don't have to pity me or feel sorry for me, I am lucky I get to write for Feministing, but all of us get put to the test on issues we are very very passionate about regularly. It is unfortunate when other supposed feminists can't be supportive of that, but instead nitpick and say rude shit, essentially playing out the patriarchy amongst each other. I also think there are some very serious racial dynamics at play here both in Margaret Cho being Asian and myself being South Asian. All of those factors combined made me decide this person had to go. Perhaps if they send me an email with an explanation or how I read it totally wrong, I would feel differently. Perhaps this conversation can continue in a more polite manner moving forward with everyone checking in with whatever they are bringing to the table.
This is as transparent as I can be.
Thank you so much for that Samhita. I was in agreement with you all along, but I appreciate you explaining the thought process that went into banning this person. Sorry to make you have to write an essay explaining yourself, but thank you for respecting us enough to do so. I get it, you are totally right, that person sucked. And thanks for all that you do here! :-)
The post was much appreciated, Samhita. I'm not sure if the person was troll, but their tone was really hostile and aggressive.
I was a little confused about the post, honestly, but I think it's cool to show that we're not perfect. I still love M. Cho, even though I'm not crazy about what she said.
Seeing caustic posters banned makes me feel a little nervous about my own contributions. I think these issues will always spark emotive reactions, and from what I've seen, quite a few Feministing editors are heated in their rebuttals and answers also.
BUT regardless, I LOVE Margaret Cho (and within that LOVE, there is a small does of anxiety for her Palin remark).
I think comedy politics is quite interesting in this respect. Sarah Silverman also often makes jokes which seemingly play into prejudice. Yet, she uses an irony which does not condone the seriousness of actual prejudice (which is, admittedly, quite hard to distinguish from the jokes which DO condone the prejudice they flaunt).
fte77 brought up some useful points for discussion in this context. From a young age, I have always wrestled with racist and sexist "humour", spoken from the mouths of racist and sexist speakers. The response was always the same: "It's a joke, get over it"--as if the form of comedy licenses pervasive and hurtful content. So quite a stumbling block (as the old 'humourless feminist' stereotype testifies).