Hair of the Dog

[Zenode]

The whole thing i don't get about this is....aren't we laughing at the CONSERVATIVE DENTIST having the misfortune to sleep with a transexual and not laughing at the transexual itself? This is just PC for the sake of being PC in my opinion. The movie doesnt say OMG A TRANSEXUAL LOOK HOW GROSS THEY ARE, yes some people might laugh AT that fact, and yes those people are bigots. But the movie wants us to laugh at Stu because he is conservative.

If we watched the exact same movie except in the situation where Stu is a racist and wakes up next to a black woman and he starts freaking out, are we laughing at the black woman or at Stu the racist?

 

[incal11]

All those explainations amounted to "The hooker in the first one had a heart of gold, this one didn't therefore she was the butt of the joke" and from you: "It's painfully obvious". I'm afraid it will take more than that to constitue a concrete argument.

That's the thing, in the first movie the hooker was a human being, in the second it is only a deshumanised joke because it is too weird for the public, too weird for you apparently. This isn't so complicated it needs an essay to be proven.

Also, what bias did the robots in ROTF provide? The way they talk? That stereotype falls squarely on the viewer, not the robots. So, yes, people project their own stereotypes everyday.

The viewers didn't imagine the way they talk, and noone talks like that who isn't a made up racist stereotype.

If we watched the exact same movie except in the situation where Stu is a racist and wakes up next to a black woman and he starts freaking out, are we laughing at the black woman or at Stu the racist?

True, but it should not stop you from considering the black woman as a sensible human being. If she was a stereotype with no redeeming value that she's not the butt of the joke doesn't excuse the racist undertone.
Here's what I've been trying to explain about Hangover2's transsexual. You may say racism is racism but this is different. No, it just means some things are too hard for you to accept, realising this would make one less bigoted.

 

[DalekJaas]

The scene was funny, stop being so politically correct and sensitive. So you wouldn't freak out if you had sex with a tranny, I think almost every hetero guy would.

 

[Mister Linton]

I guess I refuse to be called a bigot by someone who thinks the robots in transformers must be black because "dey was talkin' liek der blak steryotipes". Because nobody in real life talks like that? Live in a cave much?

And the PROSTITUTE should be considered a sensible human being? Y'know, they aren't all like Julia Roberts in that one movie...

 

[370999]

I guess I refuse to be called a bigot by someone who thinks the robots in transformers must be black because "dey was talkin' liek der blak steryotipes". Because nobody in real life talks like that? Live in a cave much?

And the PROSTITUTE should be considered a sensible human being? Y'know, they aren't all like Julia Roberts in that one movie...

Well if I had an alein race who constantly stole watermelons, loved eating chickens and were happiest when enslaved, I do believe it is quite clear as to what I am alluding to. It is how you have certain things play into racial sterotypes. Sometimes it does seem to be so suspiciously similar that it is impossible to believe that it is accidental. Of course not being telepathic it is silly hard to tell if that was the cause. there is also the issue of using it sometimes within the context of "look what group X beleives group Y behaves as". And sometimes even going for shock humour which ellicts the response "You can't say that!" is effective though crude.

I haven't seen the movie so I can't say but if it is essentially that oa hetorsexual slept wiht a person he didn't want to them I don't think that is massively offensive. Mind you not being a transexual myself I am not that massively knowledgble over what causes offence.

 

[Mister Linton]

and were happiest when enslaved,

lol wut?

 

[WaderiAAA]

I was just going to agree with the point that there's a pretty big difference between being accepting of the LGBT community and a straight man unknowingly having sex with a transsexual, and it doesn't make someone a bigot if they freak out as a result.

I think you're missing the point. He isn't saying the characters in the movie comes off as transphobic, but that the directors do, and not because of the joke itself, but how they deliver it - as in it goes on for way past the initial surprise and past the point where it only keeps being funny if you find transsexuality shocking and wrong and also that the transsexual hooker is not humanized like the hooker in the first movie.

 

[370999]

and were happiest when enslaved,

lol wut?

Lol wut What? Are you unaware of the works of fiction that would portray slavery as being the optinium place for Blacks? Thankfully antiquidated but I am sure that you instantly got what I was alluding to whcih was the point

 

[WaderiAAA]

Again, he doesn't get it. I'm not homophobic, but I don't want a cock in my ass. If someone told me they put their cock in my ass when I was drunk, I'd be shocked and disgusted.

Come on, dude. Stop the PC bullshit. I'm all willing for people to dress how they want and express their sexuality however they want, but we're talking about a CONSERVATIVE DENTIST who was shocked at marrying a hooker getting a dick in the ass. It's not about the dick, but the individual taking the dick.

I feel like Shakespeare.

Ugh... Sometimes I wonder if people like you even bother to read when he explains his views.

A) He is not saying that the reaction to the discovery is transphobic.
B) He isn't even calling the joke in itself transphobic, nor saying it couldn't have worked.

A joke like that can either be "funny because it is surprising" or "funny because it is shocking and/or wrong" (assuming of course that you find it shocking and/or wrong). When the joke goes on for way past the surprise point, it really seems like the director is going for both the former and the latter.

 

[Cliff_m85]

Again, he doesn't get it. I'm not homophobic, but I don't want a cock in my ass. If someone told me they put their cock in my ass when I was drunk, I'd be shocked and disgusted.

Come on, dude. Stop the PC bullshit. I'm all willing for people to dress how they want and express their sexuality however they want, but we're talking about a CONSERVATIVE DENTIST who was shocked at marrying a hooker getting a dick in the ass. It's not about the dick, but the individual taking the dick.

I feel like Shakespeare.

Ugh... Sometimes I wonder if people like you even bother to read when he explains his views.

A) He is not saying that the reaction to the discovery is transphobic.
B) He isn't even calling the joke in itself transphobic, nor saying it couldn't have worked.

A joke like that can either be "funny because it is surprising" or "funny because it is shocking and/or wrong" (assuming of course that you find it shocking and/or wrong). When the joke goes on for way past the surprise point, it really seems like the director is going for both the former and the latter.

Or the director was just trying to get the reactions from four separate characters? Add that the dude who got plowed is heavily conservative in comparison to the other three.

 

[Serge A. Storms]

I was just going to agree with the point that there's a pretty big difference between being accepting of the LGBT community and a straight man unknowingly having sex with a transsexual, and it doesn't make someone a bigot if they freak out as a result.

I think you're missing the point. He isn't saying the characters in the movie comes off as transphobic, but that the directors do, and not because of the joke itself, but how they deliver it - as in it goes on for way past the initial surprise and past the point where it only keeps being funny if you find transsexuality shocking and wrong and also that the transsexual hooker is not humanized like the hooker in the first movie.

That could just as easily be how he interpreted their taste in humor, the joke might have gone on as long as it did purely because of the horror of having sex with a transsexual, it takes a leap on Bob's part to assume that the joke overstaying its welcome was the director's feelings about transsexuals rather than just a poor sense of comic timing.

 

[incal11]

I haven't seen the movie so I can't say but if it is essentially that oa hetorsexual slept wiht a person he didn't want to them I don't think that is massively offensive.

The scene was funny, stop being so politically correct and sensitive. So you wouldn't freak out if you had sex with a tranny, I think almost every hetero guy would.

Of course, but the point is not that the guy freak out. It's that the movie comfort bigots in their view of a minority. Being against that is not being politically correct, it's being sensible, and being sensible is not being sensitive.
In truth I'm not really annoyed at that movie, it's the conformism behind one of it's aspect that I dislike.

Because nobody in real life talks like that? Live in a cave much?

Because some people talk somewhat like that and racist bigots make fun of it by exagerating what they find ridiculous. KKK member, hm ?
(maybe not looking at your avi, but that's what you come off to)

And the PROSTITUTE should be considered a sensible human being? Y'know, they aren't all like Julia Roberts in that one movie...

Prostitutes are all human beings first, who did not always have a choice. You just undeniably proven yourself to be a bigot with this.

 

[Mister Linton]

Well if I had an alein race who constantly stole watermelons, loved eating chickens and were happiest when enslaved, I do believe it is quite clear as to what I am alluding to. It is how you have certain things play into racial sterotypes. Sometimes it does seem to be so suspiciously similar that it is impossible to believe that it is accidental. Of course not being telepathic it is silly hard to tell if that was the cause. there is also the issue of using it sometimes within the context of "look what group X beleives group Y behaves as". And sometimes even going for shock humour which ellicts the response "You can't say that!" is effective though crude.

How about if instead of an alien race you had a white person in your movie that fit that description? Does that still qualify as racist intent?

 

[Mister Linton]

Because some people talk somewhat like that and racist bigots make fun of it by exagerating what they find ridiculous. KKK member, hm ?

Pay more attention to your surroundings so you don't come off as foolish. I'm sure others here see what I am saying.

 

[Fearzone]

Thumbs up for Hangover 2.

94% of the audience on RottenTomatoes agrees.

I thought the transgender thing was handled perfectly well. It passed quickly and I thought Stu actually took that in stride, since clearly he is an anxious and over-reactive character and responded with *a lot* more distress to other events in the movie.

 

[incal11]

Because some people talk somewhat like that and racist bigots make fun of it by exagerating what they find ridiculous. KKK member, hm ?

Pay more attention to your surroundings so you don't come off as foolish. I'm sure others here see what I am saying.

you mean racists ?
Anyway I've made my point as far as possible, now it's come down to personal insults. I'll stop here. I got you to admit you are bigoted toward trannies and prostitute, work on that (and your ability to take criticism even from people you don't like) and you'll be a better person

 

[Mister Linton]

you mean racists ?
Anyway I've made my point as far as possible, now it's come down to personal insults. I'll stop here. I got you to admit you are bigoted toward trannies and prostitute, work on that (and your ability to take criticism even from people you don't like) and you'll be a better person

Well I see you editied your post so as not to directly accuse me of being racist. You work on listening to how people talk outside your tiny bubble and pay closer attention to avatar pictures and it will help you stop making asinine comments.

 

[370999]

Well if I had an alein race who constantly stole watermelons, loved eating chickens and were happiest when enslaved, I do believe it is quite clear as to what I am alluding to. It is how you have certain things play into racial sterotypes. Sometimes it does seem to be so suspiciously similar that it is impossible to believe that it is accidental. Of course not being telepathic it is silly hard to tell if that was the cause. there is also the issue of using it sometimes within the context of "look what group X beleives group Y behaves as". And sometimes even going for shock humour which ellicts the response "You can't say that!" is effective though crude.

How about if instead of an alien race you had a white person in your movie that fit that description? Does that still qualify as racist intent?

Much more borderline. However the point I am labouring to get across is that stereotypes do exist and it does seem to be a tad silly to act like they don't.

Of course, but the point is not that the guy freak out. It's that the movie comfort bigots in their view of a minority. Being against that is not being politically correct, it's being sensible, and being sensible is not being sensitive.
In truth I'm not really annoyed at that movie, it's the conformism behind one of it's aspect that I dislike.

If my film had a black character who was a rapist would that play into some racist stereotypes of blacks? Definetly but does that mean I should deny that black actor the chance to play that character? Of course not. Simply because soemthing may be taken as a validation of an unpleasent world view doesn't mean it shouldn't be done.

Again though I will repeat that I haven't seen the film so I don't have enough information to accuratly call it, just that the notion that a male character feels a bit nauesated after sleeping with a transexual, does not seem to be inherently bigoted.

 

[Mister Linton]

Much more borderline. However the point I am labouring to get across is that stereotypes do exist and it does seem to be a tad silly to act like they don't.

It's not a matter of acting as if they don't exist, it's a matter of not applying them yourself. Obviously your example is a bit extreme, but when you take any of those stereotypes and create a connection where there isn't one you are simply participating in the problem.

Language has more to do with location than race, so it is more accurate to say that the twins were using "inner city street slang" and not "talking like black guys". The supposition that all inner city youth are african american is not stated or even implied by the voices of the robots. That onus is squarely on the viewer who objects to it.

On topic:
The actress in the scene (Yasmine Lee) recently responded to such inquiries on the message boards of Queerty.com with this to say:
"i normally don't write or respond to reviews but my friends brought this to my attention and I do for the most part call you guys my family.

when I was sent the script for the audition, I thought long and hard about the part of kimmy and how the transsexual character are being portrayed. My conclusion. This movie is a fantasy about the experience of these men. We can't look at it on a political point. this situation reflect one of the many possibilites of hetero male while in thailand."

I'll take her word on the film's intention over a straight white male internet blogger's. /discussion